Below, experts from the Atlantic Council and its Venezuela Solutions Group answer five pressing questions about the country’s ongoing political crisis.

1. What is the situation in Venezuela since the election?

Venezuela is experiencing a deepening of its crisis. The lack of transparency in the electoral process and the failure of the CNE to present the electoral bulletins have led the country into a chaotic situation. Repression is increasing by the day, reaching levels that exceed anything previously seen in Venezuela. Respect for the right to demonstrate and for the popular will of the people are fundamental pillars of any government that calls itself democratic. The world cannot remain silent in the face of the systematic and violent repression of opponents and dissidents in Venezuela.

—María Ángela Holguín is a former foreign minister of Colombia and a senior advisor to the Atlantic Council’s Venezuela Solutions Group. 

The situation in Venezuela is deeply alarming, especially given the fact that the government has not presented detailed results for each polling station to back up its figures. Transparency in the process of counting votes is essential. A thorough verification of the election results must be carried out to ensure that they faithfully reflect the will of the Venezuelan people. This verification must include a complete count of all tally sheets, which the CNE must provide without further delay.

—Miguel Vargas is a former foreign minister of the Dominican Republic and a senior advisor to the Venezuela Solutions Group.

2. What exactly is the issue with the election results?

The voting, counting, and tallying system used in Venezuela includes a mechanism for verifying its operation and auditing its results through what is known as the “paper trail.” This paper trail consists of physical records and voting receipts that verify whether the results announced by the CNE reflect the valid will of the voters. The paper trail includes several components, such as the receipt given to each voter after casting their ballot. This receipt allows voters to confirm that it contains the candidate’s name and the organization they supported. This is the first step in the verification process. Voters then place this receipt into a secure box.

At the end of the voting process, the machine immediately prints out the voting record. For the presidential election on July 28, 30,026 voting machines were deployed for the CNE, each corresponding to a separate voting table. Consequently, 30,026 original voting records were printed and kept in the custody of the Plan República military personnel. Once the machine transmits the results, copies of the voting records are printed for all witnesses. These witnesses must verify that these copies are accurate reproductions of the original records printed by the system.

Additionally, each voting record features a QR code summarizing the data printed on the record. Following the transmission, up to 54 percent of the machines are audited by manually opening the boxes containing the printed voting receipts to ensure that the data on the records is accurate.

Starting on Monday, July 29, the opposition began publishing digitized images of the voting records collected by its witnesses. It is important to note that in many cases, Plan República agents prevented opposition witnesses from accessing this material. As of the time of this report, the opposition has managed to collect, validate, and digitize 83 percent of the election records.

However, the CNE has reported hacking of the 30,026 private transmission lines for the machines (one encrypted line per machine) and has refused to disclose the results broken down by center and table. This has made it impossible to compare the opposition’s copies with the results released by the CNE. Additionally, the telecommunications audit and phase II verification, scheduled for July 29 and August 2, respectively, were suspended. These reviews are crucial for assessing the consistency of the announced results.

Trust in an automated voting system is not a matter of faith. Trust is built through auditability, and to date, the Venezuelan government has obstructed the auditability of the results. After more than two weeks, there are also reasonable concerns about the custody of physical electoral materials and databases. The initial international request to present the voting records is proving to be inadequate.

—Eugenio Martínez is the director of Votoscopio, a Venezuela elections specialist, and a member of the Venezuela Solutions Group. 

3. What role can other countries in the region play? 

Latin American countries have a crucial responsibility at this moment. It is necessary to support efforts to promote credible negotiations that will lead to a peaceful and democratic solution in Venezuela. However, it is imperative that any negotiations incorporate the desire of both the Venezuelan people and all of Latin America to respect the rule of law and democratic order in Venezuela. Only through a firm commitment to these principles can we move toward a solution that reflects the will of the Venezuelan people.

—Miguel Vargas

Faced with this reality, it is imperative that Latin American countries continue to demand electoral transparency and condemn repression and the violation of human rights. It is essential to increase diplomatic coordination and demand transparency, independent auditing, and respect for the popular vote. Only with a firm and coordinated position in the region will we be able to engender a way out of the deep crisis in Venezuela, which must occur through a credible and realistic negotiation process with the accompaniment of guarantor countries. 

—María Ángela Holguín

4. Is there any hope the Maduro regime will negotiate a transfer of power?

We must start from the premise that Maduro’s government made a political decision in ignoring the results of the presidential election. This implies a radical break with popular sovereignty, which Chavismo proclaimed as the foundation of its legitimacy. The cost of this rupture is as high as the associated costs of international isolation and of reversing steps taken toward economic stabilization, because it enshrines the divorce between the ruling coalition and its popular bases. However, the dominant coalition perceives that it can stay in power if it manages to deflate the strong feeling of change and, above all, unity, through the weakening of the leadership of María Corina Machado and González, in a kind of repetition of the resistance-attrition strategy it used to address the 2019 crisis with the interim government of Juan Guaidó.  

The ruling coalition tries to do so through repression and self-isolation. It is attempting to prevent an internationally supported negotiation from forcing it to recognize the opposition’s victory. And it is doing so with a degree of open, articulate, and express support from the military that had not been necessary to exhibit in the past. The efforts of Colombian President Gustavo Petro and Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva are geared toward opening a crack to move Maduro from his position, which at this time is completely insensitive to the usual list of incentives. Thus, it is not foreseeable that in the short term an effective negotiating body can be built to ensure the verification of results. Perhaps it is necessary to start, as in serious armed conflicts, with more basic areas of agreement, such as advancing mutual guarantees and respect for human rights.

—Colette Capriles is an associate professor and researcher in philosophy, politics, and social sciences at Simón Bolívar University and a member of the Venezuela Solutions Group.

5. How is the US working to advance a democratic transition?

On August 11, the Wall Street Journal reported that Washington is engaged in secret talks with Maduro, and may be offering him and those around him an amnesty from US narcoterrorism charges in exchange for a democratic transition. This news may be a sign that the Biden administration is trying to preserve space for negotiations behind the scenes. However, Maduro is a serial abuser of dialogue and, should these efforts fail, it is likely that the White House’s patience will run out. The good news is that the United States still holds considerable leverage, which can be used to shape elite interests and maximize opportunities for a democratic solution. 

For the Biden administration, the challenge lies in finding a balance between applying targeted, effective pressure on elites and preventing Venezuela from drifting further into Russia’s and China’s spheres of influence. Some in Washington fear that a return to “maximum pressure” could drive Maduro closer to the United States’ geopolitical rivals. Individual sanctions may be a more appealing strategy, but it will be crucial to focus this pressure on fostering a democratic opening while avoiding actions that strengthen regime unity. More than 160 regime members have already been sanctioned—many of whom have been celebrated in public ceremonies and awarded replica swords of Venezuela’s liberator, Simón Bolívar. Bringing pressure to bear while avoiding anything that helps unify Maduro’s coalition at his weakest moment in years will be absolutely crucial.

—Geoff Ramsey is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

The post Will Maduro negotiate a transfer of power? And four other questions about Venezuela’s political crisis. appeared first on Atlantic Council.

An initiative led by the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center in partnership with the US Department of State continues to focus on facilitating greater constructive exchange among multisectoral thought leaders and government leaders as they work to implement commitments made at the ninth Summit of the Americas. This readout was informed by a private, information-gathering roundtable and several one-on-one conversations with leading experts in the digital space.

Executive summary

At the ninth Summit of the Americas, regional leaders agreed on the adoption of a Regional Agenda for Digital Transformation that reaffirmed the need for a dynamic and resilient digital ecosystem that promotes digital inclusion for all peoples. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the digital divide globally, but these gaps were shown to be deeper in developing countries, disproportionately affecting women, children, persons with disabilities, and other vulnerable and/or marginalized individuals. Through this agenda, inclusive workforce development remains a key theme as an avenue to help bridge the digital divide and skills gap across the Americas.

As part of the Atlantic Council’s consultative process, thought leaders and practitioners evaluated progress made in the implementation of the Regional Agenda for Digital Transformation agreed on at the Summit of Americas, resulting in three concrete recommendations: (1) leverage regional alliances and intraregional cooperation mechanisms to accelerate implementation of the agenda; (2) strengthen public-private partnerships and multisectoral coordination to ensure adequate financing for tailored capacity-building programs, the expansion of digital infrastructure, and internet access; and (3) prioritize the involvement of local youth groups and civil society organizations, given their on-the-ground knowledge and role as critical indicators of implementation.

Recommendations for advancing digitalization and workforce development in the Americas:

Report

May 31, 2024

PACC 2030 objectives: The road to implementation

By Wazim Mowla, Charlene Aguilera

The Atlantic Council organized a PACC 2030 Working Group and worked closely with governments, the business community, and civil society organizations to support the implementation of PACC 2030’s objectives.

Caribbean Climate Change & Climate Action

Report

Apr 16, 2024

Advancing health and resilience policies in Latin America and the Caribbean

By Isabel Chiriboga, Martin Cassinelli, Diego Area

During an off-the-record private roundtable, thought leaders and practitioners from across the Americas discussed how to further enhance access to and finance for health services and products in the region.

Coronavirus Latin America

Summit of the Americas

Amid global uncertainties and new challenges, the ninth Summit of the Americas is a renewed opportunity to bring about hemispheric cooperation and consensus to reach regional prosperity and security.

Staff

Isabel Chiriboga

Assistant Director

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Colombia Corruption

Staff

Maite Gonzalez Latorre

Program Assistant

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Americas Education

Staff

Diego Area

Deputy Director, Strategic Development

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Crisis Management Democratic Transitions

The Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center broadens understanding of regional transformations and delivers constructive, results-oriented solutions to inform how the public and private sectors can advance hemispheric prosperity.

Learn more

The post The future of digital transformation and workforce development in Latin America and the Caribbean appeared first on Atlantic Council.

It is a crucial time in Mexican energy politics. While there are important challenges to address, Sheinbaum’s initial moves are a promising beginning to maximizing Mexico’s economic potential, which requires significant investment in clean energy.

Sign up for PowerPlay, the Atlantic Council’s bimonthly newsletter keeping you up to date on all facets of the energy transition.

Uncertainties complicate investment in clean energy

Under Mexican law, the new Congress takes office on September 1, but the new president takes office on October 1. The current government intends to present constitutional reforms to the new Morena-dominated legislature—the ruling party that will now likely have a supermajority—in a manner that could challenge certain policy adjustments by the new government. To that end, AMLO has stated that electoral and judicial constitutional reforms are his legislative priorities—repealing the 2013 energy reforms, which enabled an influx of foreign and private investment in Mexico’s energy sector during the mid-2010s, is not.

The outgoing government introduced complexities to private investment, especially in clean energy. These include suspending auctions in oil, gas, and clean energy, giving priority to the state electricity system operator CFE’s established fossil-based generation over cleaner and cheaper alternatives, and suspending implementation of the clean energy certificate program, which incentivized conversion to less carbon intensive electricity. Several of these actions are now the subject of disputes under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), and have disincentivized foreign investment in manufacturing, due to companies’ strict carbon-emission reduction targets—for them to set up shop or expand in Mexico, they require access to clean energy.

The government has also taken steps to prioritize Mexico’s long-established fossil-based power sector, but production by national oil champion Pemex is at historic lows despite a consistent influx of federal spending to revive the flagging company, which faces a looming debt crisis. Meanwhile, CFE is struggling to power Mexico’s growing economy amid the burdens of extreme heat and other climate-exacerbated energy challenges.

The federal government is in a challenging fiscal position, as its budget deficit is forecast to grow this year.  In addition, there appear to be adverse market reactions to controversial, proposed judicial reforms, which include appointing judges by popular vote. Some foreign investors remain cautious, particularly in the energy sector.

Mexico’s golden economic opportunity requires clean energy to sustain it

Despite these investment challenges, Mexico holds vast potential as a nearshoring destination. For Mexico to capitalize on the USMCA and its proximity to the lucrative US export market, it will need to expand its energy supply not only for manufacturing, but also to power artificial intelligence use by data centers, which will increase demand for clean energy exponentially.

It will be in the interest of both US government and energy industry stakeholders to help Sheinbaum find a way to navigate among Morena’s different groups to develop a pragmatic policy approach that moves forward Mexico’s energy security and transition while maintaining a leading role for Pemex and CFE, which remains a central element of Morena’s policy platform. Public-private partnerships of many forms can be part of the solution.

It will be challenging but possible for Sheinbaum to retain the primacy of Pemex and CFE while also giving foreign and domestic investors full confidence that they will receive permits to build and obtain reasonable returns without fear that a popularly elected judiciary and weaker national regulators will undermine their projects.

Serious policymakers will be in charge

Sheinbaum wants to make her own mark on history as the first female president of Mexico, but faces a tough road ahead. The most important benchmarks will be her cabinet appointments, her commitment to a predictable and transparent policymaking process, and her engagement on the USMCA, which comes up for review in 2026.

The composition of Sheinbaum’s cabinet will be an indication of her intent to meaningfully address Mexico’s energy and fiscal challenges. So far, the news is positive, with serious policy professionals being tapped for high-level appointments. Current Finance Minister Rogelio Ramírez de la O, who is familiar with the overall fiscal challenge, including that posed by Pemex and CFE, is slated to remain in his post. Former Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard, a highly experienced and capable politician, was named economy minister and will play a steadying hand. Luz Elena González, an economist who until recently was finance secretary of Mexico City, will be the secretary of energy, demonstrating that the government understands the relevance of public finances for energy policy. Finally, current Foreign Minister Alicia Bárcena, who is experienced in environmental issues, will become environment minister and could be a relevant actor on energy transition.

The path forward

Sheinbaum’s commitment to clear, predictable policies will be an important marker of her style of governance. This can send positive signals to investors in areas such as energy import permits and infrastructure investment. Her approach to the 2026 USMCA review—which will be deeply impacted by whoever wins the US presidential election in November—will be another test of the Sheinbaum administration’s ability to navigate a delicate bilateral relationship. That review will be a top-line issue for both the US and Mexican governments, and early consultations are already underway. Energy will loom large in this review; both the US government and private stakeholders have a powerful motivation to ensure that energy disputes do not undermine the USMCA—they need it to remain strong enough to provide certainty for the wider cross-border relationship.

Sheinbaum has much to gain from reassuring investors, capitalizing on Mexico’s advantages in nearshoring, and addressing the country’s slow energy transition. She can creatively design a framework that respects Morena’s political stance on energy while increasing investor confidence. Sheinbaum will be looking for able and willing partners to craft solutions that maximize the potential of foreign investment and job creation in Mexico. Undoubtedly, the energy industry and civil society on both sides of the border all have a major interest in helping her succeed.

David L. Goldwyn served as special envoy for international energy under President Barack Obama and assistant secretary of energy for international relations under President Bill Clinton. He is chair of the Atlantic Council’s Energy Advisory Group.

Antonio Ortiz-Mena is a professor at the Center for Latin American Studies, Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University, and a partner at DGA Group.

The views expressed are the sole responsibility of the authors and not necessarily those of any institution with which they are affiliated.

EnergySource

EnergySource is the Global Energy Center’s (GEC) online publication providing commentary and analysis on developments in the energy and climate sector from a wide-array of thought leaders, politicians, and experts.

Read more

Fellow

David L. Goldwyn

Nonresident Senior Fellow

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center Global Energy Center

Caribbean Climate Change & Climate Action

EnergySource Jun 18, 2024

US-Mexico energy cooperation is vital to enable nearshoring

By William Tobin

As the United States seeks to nearshore supply chains, Mexico’s energy sector presents a valuable opportunity for collaboration. By easing regulations on the private sector, Mexico can facilitate US energy investment without impeding its own vision for growth.

Energy & Environment Energy Markets & Governance

New Atlanticist Jun 4, 2024

Three ways Mexico’s new president could transform Central America

By María Fernanda Bozmoski

The first female president of Mexico has the opportunity to redefine her country’s role in Central America, address the root causes of migration, and promote a more stable and prosperous region.

Economy & Business Elections

New Atlanticist Jun 3, 2024

Sheinbaum just won a massive mandate in Mexico. Here’s how she might use it.

By Jason Marczak, Bosco Martí

The president-elect will certainly continue with her predecessor’s policies, but she will also be her own president.

Economy & Business Elections

The Global Energy Center develops and promotes pragmatic and nonpartisan policy solutions designed to advance global energy security, enhance economic opportunity, and accelerate pathways to net-zero emissions.

learn more

The post Pragmatism can improve Mexico’s energy outlook appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Female political representation is important. According to 2023 data, only fifty-nine of the 193 member states of the United Nations had a woman head of state or government in their history. Against this backdrop, four countries in the Caribbean have had or currently have women leaders: Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana, and Barbados. But representation still lags behind, with an average of 22 percent of ministerial portfolios and cabinet positions in the English-speaking Caribbean held by women. And according to World Bank data, only four Caribbean countries—Dominica, Guyana, St. Kitts and Nevis, and Grenada—have 30 percent or more seats in national parliaments held by women.

At the same time, greater and more effective female political representation must go hand in hand with bringing gender equity perspectives into all aspects policymaking in ways that improve the lives of citizens. In the Caribbean, women and girls face significant vulnerabilities, and gender mainstreaming is needed to address them, in particular gender-based violence.

The Caribbean has one of the highest rates of gender-based violence in the world. According to UN Women data, 46 percent of women in the Caribbean have experienced at least one form of violence in their lifetime. Jamaica, for example, has the second-highest femicide rate in the world, while 55 percent of Guyanese women have experienced at least one form of violence, including intimate partner violence or nonpartner sexual abuse. And data on gender-based violence is often underreported.

To tackle gender-based violence through gender mainstreaming in policymaking, governments in the Caribbean should work closely with civil society organizations that focus on gender and gender-based violence. They should also work with victims of gender-based violence to understand the bottlenecks of the system and its inadequate responses. With this deeper understanding, governments can map out specific areas to improve support for women victims of gender-based violence.

Governments should also include chief gender officers in key government institutions, particularly within the judicial system and the police. Chief gender officers can help ensure appropriate support, accountability, and sustainability of policies for victims of gender-based violence. These officers should be appropriately trained to bring a gender-sensitive perspective to decision-making processes, and their authority and dedicated office to these issues can help to overcome institutional inertia.

In the legal sphere, these officers should revise and help update legislation through a gender lens, as a mechanism to avoid the perpetuation of laws and norms that might have pervasive negative consequences for women and girls. Within the police, chief gender officers can be trained to welcome and support victims of gender-based violence, helping them as victims instead of discriminating against them. Focus groups commissioned by the Atlantic Council in Jamaica and Guyana, for example, found a lack of trust that institutions, such as the police, can support women victims of gender-based violence. One Jamaican woman explained, “But sometimes you go to the police and the police take your statement and look at you and be like if you wear that then you don’t think the man is going to see you.”

Ensuring that women victims of gender-based violence feel heard and supported could lead to more accurate data on this issue, as underreporting is a significant challenge. This, in turn, could help governments gain a better understanding of gender-based violence and the policies and programs that can help solve it.  

Valentina Sader is a deputy director at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, where she leads the Center’s work on Brazil, gender equality and diversity, and manages the Center’s Advisory Council.

The post The case for chief gender officers in Caribbean states appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Access to justice is a crucial component of the rule of law and the defense of democracy. A robust judicial system ensures that laws are applied fairly and equitably, strengthens confidence in institutions, protects rights, and promotes transparency and accountability, which are essential for democratic stability and economic development.¹ In a global context where threats to democracy are increasing, strengthening access to justice and the rule of law becomes even more critical. An accessible judicial system acts as a safeguard against those threats.² Access to justice for businesses and the general Colombian population is vital to ensure both fairness and economic efficiency. When businesses can resolve disputes quickly and fairly, uncertainty is reduced, fostering a favorable investment climate and sustainable economic development.

This research, based on a holistic and integrated approach, involves two key elements: a thorough understanding of access to justice and a comprehensive view of the justice system. The first element implies that effective access to justice extends beyond the initial approach to legal systems; it encompasses both the entry point and the ongoing journey within the system. The right to access justice is fully realized when it results in a prompt, comprehensive, and enforceable solution. This understanding of access to justice is essential for addressing the multifaceted challenges faced by individuals and corporations in Colombia.

Building on this thorough understanding of access to justice, this research sheds light on the problems faced by actors within the system, which affect companies of all sizes and citizens alike, regardless of their socioeconomic status. It explores the procedural journey, revealing systemic issues and managerial barriers embedded in the justice system. Forty-four percent of respondents expressed medium to high concerns about judicial corruption and threats to judicial independence and impartiality.

The second element is the comprehensive view of the Colombian justice system. Such a view requires data collection regarding the three routes of access to justice in Colombia, all different in nature: the judicial branch; administrative officials with jurisdictional functions; and individual entities that have the right to administer justice, such as conciliators and arbitrators.

The Colombian constitutional system allows the congress to delegate certain judicial powers to specific administrative authorities including superintendencies (regulatory agencies) of industry and commerce, finance, corporations, and health; police inspectors; and family commissariats, among others. However, it is worth noting that administrative authorities’ judicial power excludes criminal prosecutions and proceedings.³ When administrative authorities exercise jurisdictional functions through resolutions, they act as judges rather than as administrative entities. Individuals can choose, preventively, whether to approach judicial-branch judges or superintendencies judges with jurisdictional functions to resolve their disputes.

This report seeks to identify public policy recommendations that can enhance the efficiency and equity of the justice system through a holistic and integrated approach. Tackling access to justice during the process is crucial not only for the private sector, which relies on the justice system to protect its interests, but also for the broader Colombian society. This will ensure that justice is accessible and equitable for all.

“This timely and deeply researched report exposes another one of Colombia’s many paradoxes: although it has perhaps the most legalistic society in the hemisphere, the justice system is widely seen as incapable of delivering consistent and reliable results. The report’s authors suggest specific, concrete, and practical policy recommendations to improve justice delivery. As the report notes, a credible and efficient justice system is key to a thriving democracy, and this report will be a key resource for those committed to justice reform.”

Kevin Whitaker, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, Atlantic Council; Former US Ambassador to Colombia, US Department of State

For all jurisdictions and types of disputes included in this study (both judicial and administrative proceedings), fewer than half of the companies surveyed fully or partially agreed that the duration of proceedings is reasonable. This finding is consistent with the study’s qualitative research component and existing cross-country data on unreasonable civil-justice delays from the World Justice Project (WJP). Colombian scores on timeliness of civil-justice delivery in the WJP Rule of Law Index are lower than those of both best-in-class nations (e.g., Germany or the Netherlands) and regional and income peers in Latin America (See Graph 1).

Delays permeate the system, affecting small, medium, and large companies. When companies were asked about the obstacles limiting effective access to justice when dealing with judicial authorities, the number of legal processes that never concluded scored as the highest obstacle, with 51 percent of companies ranking it as their top obstacle and 15 percent ranking it as a medium level obstacle (See Figure 1).

Similarly, when asked about the obstacles limiting effective access to justice when resorting to administrative authorities, interviewees ranked unjustified delays as the biggest obstacle. Forty-one percent of companies ranked it as the top obstacle and 20 percent ranked it as a medium-level obstacle (See Figure 2).

In terms of judicial independence from hierarchical superiors and other sources, superintendencies perform worse than all other paths to justice, and considerably below all judges (44 percent of companies either totally or mostly disagree that this path is free from this pressure). Critically, in terms of access to justice, it is the second-worst mechanism (34 percent of companies find it difficult to access this mechanism), (See Figure 4).

Report Nov 30, 2023

Advancing US-Colombia cooperation on drug policy and law enforcement

By Atlantic Council US-Colombia Advisory Group

Consumption and price of the drug has remained stable in the United States in recent years. However, the current trend of falling coca leaf and cocaine prices in Colombia present a natural incentive for coca growers to find alternative forms of income, which could mean a higher rate of success for alternative development programs.

Civil Society Colombia

New Atlanticist May 7, 2024

Colombia’s president must focus on economic stewardship in the second half of his term

By Enrique Millan-Mejia and Geoff Ramsey

President Gustavo Petro should adopt a steadier hand on domestic issues and a more cooperative stance toward international private sector investment.

Colombia Economy & Business

Sep 29, 2021

US-Colombia Advisory Group

The Atlantic Council’s US-Colombia Advisory Council, with Senators Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Bill Hagerty (R-TN), as honorary Co-Chairs, is a nonpartisan, binational, and multi-sectoral group committed to advancing a whole-of-society approach to addressing the most vital policy issues facing the US-Colombia relationship—with a recognition of the broader implications for bilateral interests across the region more broadly.

The Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center broadens understanding of regional transformations and delivers constructive, results-oriented solutions to inform how the public and private sectors can advance hemispheric prosperity.

Learn more

The post Justice Fair Play Initiative: The key to improving justice delivery in Colombia appeared first on Atlantic Council.

While previous G20 meetings have been noteworthy for their disagreements, Brazil has emphasized substance and consensus over geopolitics during its G20 presidency. Felipe Hees, the Brazilian diplomat and sous-sherpa of this year’s G20 presidency, explained this strategy on July 25 at an Atlantic Council conference on the sidelines of the meeting. Brasília, he said, has sought to acknowledge fundamental disagreements on geopolitics between some members, and then to sidestep them entirely at the ministerial level. The big question now is: How long can this approach last?

So far, Brazilian officials have chosen to focus on economic development issues that already enjoy widespread support. Last week, this approach resulted in one of the few joint G20 ministerial-level communiqués in the past two years. Released on July 26, this communiqué displays G20 members’ alignment on launching the Global Alliance against Hunger and Poverty under the Brazilian presidency. It’s an important topic for the host country, since Brazil is the world’s leading producer of soybeans, corn, and meat, and Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has emphasized his country’s role in alleviating global food insecurity. At the same time, the issue has a wider resonance. At the Atlantic Council conference, Cindy McCain, executive director of the World Food Program, emphasized that “food security is a national security issue, and it should be labeled as one.”

Climate finance and the energy transition were at the forefront in Rio last week as well. Discussions focused on how to mobilize the public and private sector in achieving climate goals. At the Atlantic Council’s conference, Renata Amaral, the Brazilian secretary for international affairs and development in the Ministry of Planning and Budget, formally called for technical assistance from multilateral development banks for catastrophic weather events, such as the floods in southern Brazil this May. Immediately following the summit, US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen headed to Belém, the capital city of the northern Brazilian province Pará. Located near the mouth of the Amazon River, Belém was a symbolic choice for the unveiling of the US Treasury’s Amazon Region Initiative Against Illicit Finance, which is intended to help combat nature crimes.

Another issue that garnered attention last week was wealth inequality, which the Brazilian president spotlighted in his speech on June 24. “The poor have been ignored by governments and by wealthy sectors of society,” he said. Despite disagreements on whether the G20 is the right forum for the issue, it issued the first ever ministerial declaration on taxation. While Brazil’s ambition was to move the needle on a 2 percent global wealth tax, the declaration simply said that ultra-high-net-worth individuals must pay their fair share in taxes. While this fell short of Brazil’s hopes on this issue, the meetings in Rio have done more on building consensus than the past two presidencies, which have been rife with outbursts over geopolitical issues between member states.

In 2022, the then G20 president, Indonesia, saw its plan to build international cooperation for the post-pandemic recovery paralyzed by Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February. When finance ministers and foreign ministers met in April and July of the year, officials from Russia and from the United States and Europe walked out of the room when their counterparts spoke. Ministers failed to agree on a communiqué, and negotiations on climate and education also broke down over criticisms of the war. Ahead of the leaders’ summit in November 2022, Western leaders balked at the thought of sharing a table with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who ultimately did not attend the summit. In the end, the leaders could only agree to a declaration that was a broad, noncommittal summary of approaches to addressing global challenges.

Last year, India focused its G20 presidency on depoliticizing the issue of the global supply of food, fertilizers, and fuels, as well as on addressing climate change and restoring the foundations of negotiations at the forum. Its strategy was to move geopolitics off center stage by highlighting perspectives from the “Global South,” including formally adding the African Union as a full member, and thus shaping the platform as an action and communication channel between advanced economies and emerging markets.

This was difficult. Shortly into India’s presidency, Russia and China withdrew their support for the text in the Bali statement on Ukraine. At the technical level, none of the ministerial meetings produced a joint communiqué, and New Delhi was forced to issue chairs’ statements instead. Since the leaders’ summit in New Delhi, the outbreak of war between Israel and Hamas in October 2023 has made the job of navigating geopolitical tensions all the more difficult for Brazil.

While the Russian and Chinese leaders did not attend last year’s leaders’ summit, the New Delhi Declaration was nevertheless bolder and more specific than its Bali predecessor. It set the agenda for the G20 for the years ahead but offered few specifics on how to achieve these goals.

Will Brazil’s strategy of sidestepping geopolitics work at the leaders’ summit scheduled for November 18-19 in Rio? Finance ministers and central bank governors can ignore geopolitics; presidents and prime ministers often cannot. If Brasília concludes technical negotiations on the various proposals ahead of the leaders’ summit, then consensus-building at the gathering will be easier, as geopolitics will remain just an elephant in the room.

If Brazil is successful, it can end the stalemate that the G20 has found itself in and remake it into a relevant economic coordination body—one that can adequately address the goals of its emerging market and advanced economy members. If Brazilian officials are not successful, however, the forum’s relevance may begin to wane.

It has been in the interest of the last few G20 presidencies to keep up the balancing act between the United States, China, and Russia. Moreover, it is likely that South Africa will follow this approach as it takes on its presidency in 2025. As many of the discussions in Rio noted, however, what happens in the US presidential elections this November could determine both the relevance and the tone of the G20 meetings going forward.

Ananya Kumar is the deputy director, future of money at the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center.

Mrugank Bhusari is assistant director at the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center.

The post Dispatch from Rio: Can Brazil set the G20 leaders’ summit up for success? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On July 30, 2024, Vice President and Senior Director of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center Jason Marczak was interviewed on BBC Newshour about the results of Venezuela’s presidential election.

More about our expert

Staff

Jason Marczak

Vice President and Senior Director

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Americas Caribbean

The post Marczak interviewed by BBC Newshour on Venezuela’s election appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On July 30, 2024, Senior Fellow Geoff Ramsey of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center was quoted in The New York Times about the Venezuelan election.

More about our expert

Staff

Geoff Ramsey

Senior Fellow

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Civil Society Democratic Transitions

The post Ramsey quoted in The New York Times about Venezuela’s presidential election appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On July 30, 2024, Senior Fellow Geoff Ramsey of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center was interviewed on BBC’s World Business Report about the Atlantic Council’s Memo to the President outlining scenarios and paths forward for Venezuela.

More about our expert

Staff

Geoff Ramsey

Senior Fellow

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Civil Society Democratic Transitions

The post Ramsey interviewed by BBC World Business Report appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On July 28, 2024, Senior Fellow Geoff Ramsey of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center was quoted on NPR’s All Things Considered about Venezuela’s contested election.

More about our expert

Staff

Geoff Ramsey

Senior Fellow

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Civil Society Democratic Transitions

The post Ramsey quoted on NPR’s All Things Considered appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On July 29, 2024, Vice President and Senior Director Jason Marczak of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center was quoted by The Hill about Venezuela’s contested election.

More about our expert

Staff

Jason Marczak

Vice President and Senior Director

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Americas Caribbean

The post Marczak quoted by The Hill on Venezuela appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On July 29, 2024, Senior Fellow Geoff Ramsey of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center was interviewed on DW’s The Day (broadcast on PBS in the United States) about the evolving situation following Venezuela’s presidential election.

More about our expert

Staff

Geoff Ramsey

Senior Fellow

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Civil Society Democratic Transitions

The post Ramsey interviewed on DW’s The Day appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On July 29, 2024, Vice President and Senior Director Jason Marczak of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center was quoted by AP about Venezuela’s contested election.

More about our expert

Staff

Jason Marczak

Vice President and Senior Director

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Americas Caribbean

The post Marczak quoted by AP on Venezuela’s election appeared first on Atlantic Council.

He’s not giving up without a fight. Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s election commission declared him the winner in Sunday’s vote, despite ample evidence of fraud and intimidation. Opposition candidate Edmundo González declared victory as the United States and other countries expressed concerns about the results. What will be the opposition’s next move? How will Maduro respond? And what role will regional and global powers play? We polled our experts for the answers.

• Jason Marczak (@jmarczak): Vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center
• Iria Puyosa (@NSC): Senior research fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab
• Geoff Ramsey (@GRamsey_LatAm): Senior fellow at the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

How to steal an election

• The stage was set for this moment in the months leading up to the vote, when the regime banned opposition leader María Corina Machado, with González ending up on the ballot. Then, as Jason points out, only small delegations from the United Nations and the Carter Center were allowed to monitor the vote, meaning “the González campaign could only count on its own observers to verify results.” 
• The González camp said he won about 70 percent of the votes that his team was able to verify—while Venezuela’s National Electoral Council claimed that González won 44 percent of the vote, with Maduro earning 51 percent. Jason notes that “it would be a mathematical miracle for Maduro to prevail” based on how the opposition has described the votes that it has seen.
• The public isn’t fooled, Iria tells us, noting the “outpouring of messages and videos on social media” from witnesses on the ground indicating their certainty that González won. “This is strengthening the opposition’s unity and determination to continue its fight for the restoration of democracy,” she adds.
• As of this afternoon, those voters are mobilizing in the streets, creating a new test for the regime. “Maduro has to convince the ruling elite that he can keep things under control, but both he and the military know that he can’t govern a country in flames,” Geoff says. “He’s effectively inviting the biggest loyalty test he’s faced in years.”

Subscribe to Fast Thinking email alerts

Sign up to receive rapid insight in your inbox from Atlantic Council experts on global events as they unfold.

• Email*
• Name
  This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Pressure from abroad

• In addition to the “serious concerns” expressed by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, several countries throughout the region called for more transparency around the vote count—including neighboring Colombia, where, as Jason notes, “President Gustavo Petro has maintained a close relationship with Maduro.”
• Without full results and an independent audit, “the international community has no choice but to respond with swift condemnation and diplomatic pressure,” Geoff says, with the United States and its allies in Latin America and Europe playing a crucial role.
• That international pressure will be important to uphold the will of Venezuelans, but there are self-interested reasons for regional and international powers to push for change. Jason says another six years of Maduro will lead to “new outward migration flows and new transnational criminal activity that will extend far beyond Venezuela’s borders.”

Crackdown at home?

• The major point of contention will be sanctions, which the United States reimposed in April after the Maduro government didn’t uphold its end of last year’s deal to hold free and fair elections. “I doubt Venezuelan elites are eager for six more years of repression, sanctions, and economic catastrophe,” Geoff says.
• The opposition, therefore, should “exploit divisions within the ruling coalition,” Iria says. At the same time, opposition leaders should “find ways to address public discontent without exposing the population to the violent repression experienced in 2017.”
• And if Maduro were to return to the bargaining table, it would look very different from the negotiations between the government and the opposition, Iria tells us. Now, she says, negotiations would no longer be about electoral conditions “but rather on Chavismo’s exit from power after its defeat in the voting booths. The next six months will be a crucial period of intense conflict in Venezuela.”

The post Can Maduro hold onto power? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Click to jump to an expert analysis:

Jason Marczak: The international community must apply pressure for a full, transparent vote count

Geoff Ramsey: Maduro is inviting the biggest loyalty test he’s faced in years

Iria Puyosa: A new cycle of heightened political turmoil looms over Venezuela

Diego Area: The world must stand with Venezuelans in their fight for free elections

The international community must apply pressure for a full, transparent vote count

The day after Venezuelans voted in massive numbers, it’s crystal clear that Maduro, a deeply unpopular authoritarian leader, was always going to claim electoral victory whether by hook or by crook. With most international observers banned from coming to the country to monitor the vote (except small United Nations and Carter Center delegations), the González campaign could only count on its own observers to verify results. The voting tabulations that opposition observers could verify (about 40 percent of the tabulations) showed González receiving 70 percent of the vote—a far cry from the 44 percent of votes that the country’s National Electoral Council claimed that González won.

It is important that the votes of the Venezuelan people are not an exercise in futility. Votes must be credibly counted. Here, it is imperative that the international community of democracies continue to resoundingly denounce fraud and take appropriate action. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken noted “serious concerns that the result announced does not reflect the will or the votes of the Venezuelan people.” Similar concerns have been raised in nearby Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Ecuador, and the Dominican Republic. European partners have also raised concerns. Even in Colombia, where President Gustavo Petro has maintained a close relationship with Maduro, Foreign Minister Luis Gilberto Murillo made a “call for the total vote count, its verification, and independent audit to be carried out as soon as possible.”

The international community must continue to exact pressure so that the will of the Venezuelan people can ultimately prevail. Not doing so would mean being complicit in the disenfranchisement of the Venezuelan people. But another six years of Maduro will also have reverberations, including new outward migration flows and new transnational criminal activity that will extend far beyond Venezuela’s borders.

—Jason Marczak is the vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

Maduro is inviting the biggest loyalty test he’s faced in years

More than twelve hours after polls closed, the fact that authorities still haven’t released the full vote count tells you everything you need to know about yesterday’s election. It seems that Maduro has decided to condemn Venezuela to six more years of conflict and isolation. Unless the government backs up its claim of victory with the full results and opens the count up to audits from observers, the international community has no choice but to respond with swift condemnation and diplomatic pressure.

This isn’t over yet. Maduro has to convince the ruling elite that he can keep things under control, but both he and the military know that he can’t govern a country in flames. He’s effectively inviting the biggest loyalty test he’s faced in years. I doubt Venezuelan elites are eager for six more years of repression, sanctions, and economic catastrophe. The opposition, under María Corina Machado’s leadership, has maintained unity and message discipline, and has the evidence in hand to document fraud and mobilize the public against Maduro’s blatant power grab. The role of the United States and its allies in Latin America and Europe will be crucial. It’s time for greater multilateral coordination in order to push the government to respect the will of the people and restore Venezuelans’ fundamental right to elect their leaders.

—Geoff Ramsey is a senior fellow at the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

A new cycle of heightened political turmoil looms over Venezuela

The presidential elections in Venezuela turned out as forecasted: a high voter turnout, what appeared to be a decisive electoral win for the democratic opposition, and a blatant fraud that disregarded the will of the voters. 

Due to the relatively small voting centers and the presence of witnesses from local communities, the population is convinced—as we’ve seen in an outpouring of messages and videos on social media—that González won in all electoral districts. This is strengthening the opposition’s unity and determination to continue its fight for the restoration of democracy. 

Maduro’s loss of political legitimacy has left the ruling coalition vulnerable to increased instability. It will likely resort to further repression against the political opposition and organized civil society. The increase in information censorship in the week leading up to the elections is a clear sign of the severe restriction of civic space. 

The democratic opposition, led by Machado, must aim to exploit divisions within the ruling coalition to weaken its power base. The Unitary Platform must also find ways to address public discontent without exposing the population to the violent repression experienced in 2017. 

On the international front, Maduro is facing isolation from Latin American democracies, the United States, and Europe. Former allies, such as Brazil under President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Colombia under Petro, were among the first to demand transparency in the election results. It now falls upon the United States to reevaluate the Qatar agreements. The negotiations would no longer be centered on electoral coexistence but rather on Chavismo’s exit from power after its defeat in the voting booths. The next six months will be a crucial period of intense conflict in Venezuela. 

—Iria Puyosa is a senior research fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab.

The world must stand with Venezuelans in their fight for free elections

No one thought it would be easy to remove an autocrat from power, but yesterday marked a new height in the Venezuelan government’s abuses to impede the will of the people. The people of Venezuela and their leadership have endured an epic journey to overcome obstacles and unite around the ideal of change. The disqualification of candidates like Machado and Corina Yoris, who represented genuine alternatives, and the subsequent voter suppression efforts and significant irregularities in the process, illustrate the regime’s determination to retain power at any cost.

Maduro’s actions to undermine the democratic process and steal this election pose grave consequences for the future of the country and have a direct impact on Latin America, the Caribbean, and the United States. By stifling free choice, the regime is not only eroding democratic institutions but also exacerbating the country’s humanitarian crisis. As a result, Venezuelans will continue to flee in search of opportunities and freedoms denied at home, contributing to an already critical migration crisis.

The world must stand with Venezuelans in their fight for a future where elections are not merely symbolic but are actual pathways to change. The integrity of the democratic process is crucial not only for Venezuela’s stability but also for the prosperity of the entire region.

—Diego Area is a deputy director at the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

The post Experts react: Maduro is clinging to power after a disputed election. What’s next for Venezuela? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On July 28, 2024, Senior Fellow Geoff Ramsey of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center was quoted by the Washington Post about Venezuela’s contested election.

More about our expert

Staff

Geoff Ramsey

Senior Fellow

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Civil Society Democratic Transitions

The post Ramsey quoted in the Washington Post on Venezuelan election appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On July 28, 2024, Senior Fellow Geoff Ramsey of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center was interviewed by BBC News about the Venezuelan presidential election taking place that day.

Venezuela is STILL waiting for results in its presidential election.

An exit poll predicts an opposition victory but both sides sound confident.

"If the ruling socialist party actually has the results then the electoral authorities should be able to prove it."@GRamsey_LatAm pic.twitter.com/wtG4DOO9U4

— Carl Nasman (@CarlNasman) July 29, 2024

More about our expert

Staff

Geoff Ramsey

Senior Fellow

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Civil Society Democratic Transitions

The post Geoff Ramsey interviewed by BBC News on Venezuela’s election appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On July 28, 2024, Senior Fellow Geoff Ramsey of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center was quoted by Bloomberg about Venezuela’s contested election.

More about our expert

Staff

Geoff Ramsey

Senior Fellow

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Civil Society Democratic Transitions

The post Ramsey quoted by Bloomberg about Venezuela appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On July 28, 2024, Senior Fellow Geoff Ramsey of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center was quoted on NPR’s Weekend Edition Sunday about Venezuela’s election.

More about our expert

Staff

Geoff Ramsey

Senior Fellow

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Civil Society Democratic Transitions

The post Ramsey quoted on NPR’s Weekend Edition Sunday appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On July 26, 2024, Senior Fellow Geoff Ramsey of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center was quoted by the Los Angeles Times about Venezuela’s election.

More about our expert

Staff

Geoff Ramsey

Senior Fellow

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Civil Society Democratic Transitions

The post Ramsey quoted in Los Angeles Times on Venezuela’s election appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Public Event Thu, July 25, 2024 • 8:30 am ET

Shaping the global economy: From food security to digital transformation

Shaping the global economy conference will develop a blueprint for the G20 to address the range of challenges facing its member states from global economic governance and digital transformation to food security and hunger. 

Brazil China Digital Policy Energy Markets & Governance

“We’ve lost all the progress that we’ve made in the past fifteen years” on lowering global hunger levels, World Food Programme (WFP) Executive Director Cindy McCain warned on Thursday.

McCain spoke at an Atlantic Council event hosted on the sidelines of the Group of Twenty (G20) meeting of finance ministers and central bank governors in Rio de Janeiro. She pointed out that one in eleven people globally faced hunger last year.

On Wednesday, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva announced that Brazil—which holds the G20 presidency—will later this year launch the Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty to bring countries together in sharing knowledge and resources.

“We have the capability as a planet to feed everybody on the planet—we grow enough food,” McCain said, “but we don’t” due to funding and other coordination issues.

With those challenges, the Global Alliance is “a great opportunity for all of us . . . to get together, exchange ideas, brainstorm” and to “develop science and technology” tools to help, McCain said.

Below are more highlights from the conversation, moderated by Valentina Sader, deputy director at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

Food security

• Food security is a “national security issue,” and “it should be labeled as one,” McCain argued, pointing out how access to food has shaped broader security crises in Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.
• Yet, food security “gets kicked down” the list of priorities every time “something else happens in the world,” McCain warned.
• She said that the WFP and United Nations agencies, because they provide critical aid, are “on the front lines” of crises and the “first in and last out.”
• The WFP previously got most of its grain from Ukraine. But it has had to diversify its sources in the wake of the agricultural disruptions caused by Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. WFP is also working with other countries to help them mitigate the effects of the conflict on global food supplies.
• In the global hunger crisis, “women and children are taking the brunt,” McCain said. “You’ve never seen more of an example of it than in Gaza.”
• She added that equity and gender inclusion are important to factor into food security efforts because “a woman will feed her family,” and while doing so, “she will make sure everybody else eats” before she does.
• Moreover, with women making up around half of smallholder farmers, McCain argued that it is important to make sure that these women have the tools, expertise, seeds, and access to water that they need to farm effectively. “If a woman farms and can feed her family, she will wind up feeding the community,” McCain said.

Farm to negotiating table

• McCain noted that G20 countries include not only the world’s leading economies but also some of the planet’s largest agricultural producers. That, she said, empowers these countries to work together to address the full spectrum of food-security challenges, from poverty to improvements in agriculture.
• She added that the G20 is an optimal forum for raising the urgency around hunger because of how it brings together both governments and civil society organizations from countries that represent 85 percent of the world’s gross domestic product and over 60 percent of its population. “So the voice is huge,” she said, adding that “governments simply cannot do it all. We need everybody in on this.”
• She urged global stakeholders to “continue to elevate the conversation” about the urgency of food security—and advised countries “most affected” by food insecurity to keep conveying the plight they face. “The problem is [that] around the world, people don’t understand what’s going on” or believe that hunger and malnutrition are only problems in Africa rather than globally, she said. “It’s all about. . . making sure that people understand.”

Katherine Walla is the associate director of editorial at the Atlantic Council. 

Watch the full event

The post ‘We’re back to square one’ in fighting the hunger crisis, warns Cindy McCain appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On July 17th, Global China Hub Nonresident Fellow Leland Lazarus published an article on the potential national security concerns of the Chinese-build port in Chancay, Peru in China US Focus.

Fellow

Leland Lazarus

Nonresident Fellow

Global China Hub

Caribbean China

The post Leland Lazarus on the Chinese-built port in Chancay, Peru in China US Focus appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Since US President Joe Biden dropped out of the presidential race and endorsed Harris on Sunday, she has emerged as the likely Democratic nominee. So what might US foreign policy look like if she wins the presidency? For Harris, the daughter of Jamaican and Indian immigrants, there are ample clues in her work in the Americas over the past three-and-a-half years. Her approach: Listen to a broad array of stakeholders, act, follow up, and then adjust tactics as needed. This approach can take time to implement, but it also proves adaptive to unexpected challenges.

Although the United States’ southern border was not specifically part of the portfolio handed to her, Harris’s indirect involvement—through her role in seeking to reduce migratory push factors in northern Central America—has received considerable scrutiny, especially among those who criticize the Biden administration’s approach to migration. The data at this point indicate that the Biden administration has made progress in reducing the number of migrants arriving at the US border from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador to levels last seen toward the end of the Trump administration, even as increased migration from other countries has contributed to a high level of overall encounters at the border.

At the same time, more work is clearly needed to ensure that migration levels from northern Central America do not jump back up. It is imperative that the efforts undertaken as part of the ongoing “root causes” strategy carry forward no matter who wins the US election in November. This means ensuring that local organizations have the technical and financial resources to improve opportunities for job creation and human-capital development and also to combat often-endemic corruption. These and other conditions are needed not just to dampen the drive to migrate but also to create longer-term economic security that ultimately benefits the national security of the United States and partner countries.

In one example of her “listen, act, then follow up” approach, Harris traveled to Guatemala and Mexico in June 2021. A month later, she rolled out a five-pillar strategy that revolved around working with in-country partners to address the root causes of Central American migration, noting that “migration to our border is also a symptom of much larger issues” and admitting from the start that “progress will not be instantaneous.” She subsequently visited Honduras in January 2022. In March 2024, she welcomed Guatemala’s new president, Bernardo Arévalo, to the White House for more discussions. This approach suggests that Harris could govern in a manner where decisions are carefully thought out and where a multitude of factors are taken into account before acting.

In its three years, the five-pillar strategy has produced more than $5.2 billion in commitments from companies and organizations to invest in the region while supporting local development in areas of high emigration. And there are signs that migration from the region is now slowing. The number of Guatemalans encountered at the southwestern border last month (11,485) was the second-lowest since November 2020. The number of Hondurans (8,896) was the lowest over the same period. Overall, the proportion of migrants encountered at the US border who are citizens of Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador has dropped from 49 percent (March 2021) to 18 percent (June 2024).

Still, reflecting the shift in migrant patterns, including new or growing countries of origin, the overall number of migrant encounters by border authorities remains high (130,419 in June) as compared to the last full month of the previous administration (73,994 encounters in December 2020).

Though it has been less high-profile than her Central America work, Harris has also given substantial attention to addressing the many significant challenges facing the United States’ Caribbean neighbors. As she has explained it, doing so is a US national security priority that cannot be overlooked.

In June 2023, just over a year after virtually hosting leaders of fifteen Caribbean nations, Harris became the highest-ranking US official to visit The Bahamas, where she co-hosted the US-Caribbean Leaders Meeting. That meeting—and her overall engagement—has been focused on establishing a greater US presence in the Caribbean at a time in which it’s becoming increasingly apparent that Caribbean prosperity yields benefits for the United States too. The region’s geographic proximity also means that there is a national security imperative for the United States to be more fully engaged in a partnership with the Caribbean.

In keeping with her typical approach, Harris met with Caribbean leaders first to hear their priorities before crafting a strategy. Her priorities started with climate change and the energy transition, expanded to food security, and then extended to security and arms trafficking. At that June 2023 meeting, she announced $100 million of US assistance to address these issues, including Haiti’s ongoing humanitarian crisis. (In parallel with these efforts, the Atlantic Council organized the PACC 2030 Climate Resilient Clean Energy Summit on the sidelines of her Bahamas trip.) Still, as with her Central America portfolio, substantial progress will not happen overnight.  

Over the coming days and weeks, Harris will set about defining what her foreign policy might look like. In the course of her work as vice president with Central America and the Caribbean, at least, she has taken on tough issues that don’t lend themselves to easy, quick solutions. And she has followed through on implementation, adjusting tactics along the way as the situation on the ground evolves. As she seeks to become commander-in-chief at a time of deep global instability, she will have no shortage of complicated challenges to confront.

Jason Marczak is the vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

The post What Kamala Harris’s record in Central America and the Caribbean reveals about her foreign policy approach appeared first on Atlantic Council.

What does the US president need to know? Our “memo to the president” series has the answer with briefings on the world’s most pressing issues from our experts, drawing on their experience advising the highest levels of government.

Bottom line up front: Although Venezuela’s July 28 presidential election will take place amid high volatility, a significant likelihood of protests, and possible repression, it represents the best opportunity for a peaceful, democratic solution to the country’s long-running political crisis. The election will most likely be followed by a political negotiation process. Venezuelan economic, political, and military elites want the last three years of economic growth and greater international integration to continue, and incumbent Nicolás Maduro has a strong incentive to connect to the global economy and avoid the resumption of international pressure. The United States and its partners should take advantage of this, offering incentives and support for a Venezuelan-led negotiation process to encourage the restoration of Venezuela’s democratic institutions.

Background: Regardless of the election results, both the ruling party and the opposition will face incentives to negotiate.

A July 12 scenario-planning exercise, held by the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center and Florida International University’s Jack D. Gordon Institute, identified several possible outcomes for the election and the weeks that follow.¹

Scenario 1: Venezuelan electoral authorities declare Maduro the winner, with no documented evidence of irregularities or vote tampering.

If Venezuelan electoral authorities in the National Electoral Council declare Maduro the winner, he will face the enormous challenge of “landing the plane” and continuing down the current path of sanctions relief, global reintegration, and the restoration of diplomatic relations. He cannot credibly do so without entering into a sustainable negotiation process with the opposition, in which both parties are willing to make the significant concessions required.

• The specific aftermath of a Maduro victory will depend on whether there is clear evidence of irregularities or tampering with the vote count on election day. Maduro’s best hope of winning by the numbers is if participation is low and the opposition base is unmotivated to turn out at the polls.
• Some in Maduro’s ruling United Socialist Party (PSUV) believe they can successfully mobilize the party base to outperform polls and demotivate opposition voters, as has occurred on several instances over the last twenty-five years—most recently in the 2021 state and municipal elections. They believe they can count on the minimum of five or six million votes that Maduro received in the 2018 election, which the opposition boycotted.

Scenario 2: Venezuelan electoral authorities declare Maduro the winner, despite evidence of irregularities and vote tampering.

• Even if the ruling party were to commit documented acts of electoral fraud, Maduro’s first challenge would be to reassure elements in the ruling PSUV and armed forces leadership that he would be able to continue the last three years of economic growth. He will be unable to do that in the face of opposition protests and the risk of an escalation in the international pressure campaign—which would be almost inevitable in the case of blatant vote rigging.
• The irregularities could begin before July 28. Credible polling suggests that opposition candidate Edmundo González Urrutia has a fifteen- to twenty-percentage point lead over Maduro, although that number is lower among the most likely Venezuelan voters. If it becomes clear that Maduro’s party has no chance of winning the vote count, even through abstention, there is a chance that the Supreme Tribunal of Justice will ban González’s Democratic Unity Table Roundtable coalition—this would likely guarantee an advantage to Maduro and dissuade opposition participation. A TSJ ruling could ensure that votes for the Democratic Unity Table Roundtable would be invalidated, and would force the base to either call for abstention, cast votes for González under less popular tickets from the Un Nuevo Tiempo or Movimiento Por Venezuela parties, or align behind an alternate candidate such as Enrique Marquez.
• The ruling party could also engage in vote tampering on election day. However, this would be very difficult to conceal given the opposition’s election monitoring efforts and the presence of independent international observers affiliated with the Carter Center and the United Nations. Previous instances of fraud, such as when observers documented tampering with voter tally sheets in Bolivar state in the 2017 regional elections, have been clearly documented by comparing results with poll witness records.
• A clearly fraudulent result would likely trigger street protests organized by opposition leader María Corina Machado and others. As in previous protest waves in 2014, 2017, and 2019, this may lead to clashes with security forces, but the prospect of these mobilizations forcing a change in government is highly unlikely. All eyes will be on Machado to gauge how she would react to low turnout or electoral fraud, and what each would mean for the prospect of unrest.
• The security forces will likely be reluctant to engage in massive repression on the scale seen in the 2014 and 2017 protests, given how this fueled international condemnation and the investigation of International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim Khan. Elites in the military and ruling party would likely apply quiet pressure on Maduro, even as he declares victory, to demonstrate an openness to reforms and a willingness to signal an element of power-sharing with the opposition in his next term.
• Such overtures could split an opposition that has become more unified today than in the past. For ruling elites, there is no interest in reversing the last three years of economic growth and returning the country to the worst period of the country’s crisis, including greater international isolation.
• The private sector in Venezuela would likely seek to ensure the continuation of government policies that have helped jumpstart growth and slow inflation to its lowest level in twelve years. Business leaders know that a fraudulent win by Maduro would jeopardize this, with all eyes on whether the US government would return to a pressure campaign that would place investment at risk.
• An escalation of the border challenges with neighboring Guyana to deflect pressure at home cannot be ruled out, though it is unlikely. This would be a double-edged sword for the government, as the military is uninterested in assuming the risk of outright conflict with Guyana and would prefer to maintain tensions at current levels.

Scenario 3: Venezuelan electoral authorities declare González the winner.

A recognized opposition victory would face a myriad of immediate challenges. To have any hope of assuming office in January 2025, González would need to reach a comprehensive agreement with Maduro and the PSUV. Any negotiations must address complicated issues such as institutional reforms, transitional justice, the release of political prisoners, and electoral conditions for the upcoming legislative and regional elections. It is difficult to imagine Maduro ceding power without ironclad guarantees from the opposition and the international community regarding his safety, immunity, and influence, and that of his inner circle.

• The opposition’s best hope of translating polling support for González into votes on July 28 is massive voter participation. Given the opposition’s own election monitoring efforts and the presence of international electoral observers, an overwhelming margin of victory would be difficult to paper over by vote tampering.
• Voter participation at around the same level as the 2013 presidential election (roughly 80 percent) could cement an opposition win and could even force actors in the ruling party to recognize the result.
• The PSUV coalition is likely to face internal fragmentation in the event of a clear, recognized González win. While moderates in the ruling coalition may be willing to bet on their political future in a post-transition landscape, more hardline elements in the PSUV and security forces could derail a transition in pursuit of self-preservation. Here, the armed forces will almost certainly have outsized influence over a transition and would likely seek to dictate the terms of a transfer of power.
• The unity of the opposition would come under strain after a González win. While Machado has been the face of the electoral campaign over the last nine months, González is on the ballot as she is currently banned from holding office as part of a longstanding campaign against her. The opposition coalition would have to define where Machado stands in the decision-making apparatus, with the added complication that the Maduro government has explicitly refused to negotiate directly with her—and will likely continue to do so if the opposition wins. This would pose an early test of González’s leadership.
• The role of the international community will be crucial. To be credible, any opposition guarantees would have to be backed up by the United States, which could offer full sanctions relief and diplomatic recognition to Caracas, and lift bounties placed on the heads of PSUV leaders. European and Latin American heads of state also have a role to play. Still, due to its sanctions policy, the US role—and Maduro’s trust that guarantees will hold under any US administration—is vital.
• The international community should pay close attention to the prospect of fragmentation in the ruling coalition, particularly among the mid-level officer ranks in the armed forces, who will also seek guarantees and to preserve their influence.
• Having been out of power for twenty-five years, the opposition’s return to government could come with a high degree of administrative turbulence. The opposition would face significant incentives to seek technical assistance and advisory support in governance, economic reform, and public administration from the private sector, international organizations, foreign governments, and nongovernmental organizations—all while negotiating its policy approach with the outgoing PSUV, which would likely seek to retain political influence.

How the United States and international allies should respond:

1. Keep the focus on election data from credible international observers and independent monitoring efforts.
   • Prioritize data and reports from local and international independent observers, including the Carter Center and the United Nations, to assess the legitimacy of the election results. Communication with the public and international partners should be clear, consistent, and fact-based.
   • Rather than making a snap decision regarding developments on July 28, wait until the detailed vote count at the polling station level has been released, as has occurred in almost all previous elections. Delay any policy shift until there is a clear picture of the results.
   • Any actions should be grounded in verified data and credible sources to avoid hasty or misinformed decisions.
2. Explore opportunities for coordinated US and EU sanctions relief to accelerate incentives and advance negotiations.
   • Regardless of the election result, both González and Maduro understand they cannot govern a country in flames, and any effort to keep sanctions relief and normalization on the table will require them to negotiate the terms of governability.
   • There will be a deep need for greater multilateral coordination by sanctioning countries. The United States, as the only country to impose oil and financial sanctions against Venezuela, has outsized leverage, but the European Union and others that have sanctioned government officials can also place sanctions on the table to support negotiations.
   • Any solution will also require complex discussions regarding the restoration of the country’s democratic institutions while ensuring a place for Chavismo in the country’s political landscape.
3. No need to start from scratch.
   • The basis of any dialogue should be the 2021 Mexico City memorandum of understanding, which has served as the framework for international negotiations facilitated by the Norwegian Foreign Ministry with US, EU, and other international support.
   • This agreement outlined a seven-part agenda for dialogue efforts that have not been fully addressed, including guarantees of political rights for all, the restoration of constitutional order, coexistence and reparation for victims, economic reforms, and the verification and implementation of future agreements.
   • From there, talks can expand to focus on power sharing, the release of political prisoners, a judiciary overhaul, reforms of the security forces, the separation of powers, and improvements to electoral conditions ahead of 2025 legislative and regional elections.
   • The United States and international allies should focus on achievable, incremental progress rather than aiming for comprehensive solutions immediately. Small victories can build momentum and trust.
4. Promote a regional response led by Colombia and Brazil.
   • The United States and allies should emphasize solidarity among these neighboring countries, encouraging them to take lead roles in support of negotiation efforts while ensuring that Norwegian facilitators retain their influence on ongoing talks. Brazil, which has ceded space to Colombia so far, in particular could play a more active role.
   • Joint statements and actions can amplify impact, and the international community should formalize the ‘’Group of Friends’’ mechanism outlined in the 2021 memorandum of understanding. The creation of such a group, while still giving primacy to existing negotiations, would provide clarity for regional leaders seeking to coordinate Venezuela policy and allow more formal negotiating channels with Venezuela to incentivize more robust compliance with existing accords.
5. Regardless of outcome, consider the long-term benefits of an expanded Western footprint in Venezuela.
   • Specific licenses issued by the Treasury Department have allowed Western energy companies to maintain operations in Venezuela. The current foreign investment framework permits new modes of governance and payment and new rules of reporting, and provides opportunities for greater transparency.
   • Though sanctions are an important part of the United States’ leverage in Venezuela, there is space and good reason for this investment framework to be expanded. It is not in the US interest to sit back and watch as its rivals deepen their footprints in the country with the largest proven oil reserves on the planet—nor is it in the US interest to see Venezuela grow closer to these authoritarian powers and drift further into authoritarian rule.
   • Allied governments should continue to consider the broader geopolitical context, including relationships with China, Russia, and other influential countries with interests in Venezuela. The goal should be balanced policies that address these dynamics, acknowledge Venezuela’s role in global energy markets, and prioritize the humanitarian needs and human rights of the Venezuelan people.

Geoff Ramsey is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, and a leading expert on US policy towards Venezuela.

Jason Marczak is vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, and launched the center’s work on Venezuela in 2017. He is an adjunct professor at The George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs.

Brian Fonseca is director of the Jack D. Gordon Institute for Public Policy and an adjunct professor in the department of politics and international relations at Florida International University’s Steven J. Green School of International and Public Affairs.

Eduardo A. Gamarra is a tenured full professor of political science in the department of politics and international relations at Florida International University.

¹ Aspects of the discussion during our scenario-planning exercise informed this memo, but the memo is not meant to reflect the views of any participants other than the authors. There was, however, broad agreement that, independent of the results of the election, the winner will face incentives to negotiate the terms of governability, avoid a deepening of the crisis, and prevent another cycle of unrest and repression.

The post Memo to the president: Seizing the opportunity for a democratic solution in Venezuela appeared first on Atlantic Council.

The post Lipsky cited in Bloomberg on US efforts to persuade emerging market countries to publicly criticize China’s export practices during the G20 appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Once the most vigorous democracy in Latin America, Venezuela started down a slow path toward autocracy twenty-five years ago. It also became a model for digital authoritarianism and an exporter of democratic backsliding to the rest of the Americas. Control of the information space, widespread surveillance, and digital repression are significant pillars of the current regime’s survival. Incumbent Nicolás Maduro is counting on this, along with electoral manipulation and judicial control, to remain in power as Venezuela holds a presidential election on July 28. Nonetheless, a cohesive democratic coalition mobilizing the population across the country has a serious chance of making this election the starting point for a transition toward re-democratization.

The media landscape in Venezuela is fragmented and marked by censorship. The rise of government-run media and state control through ownership changes or censorship mechanisms led independent journalists to migrate to small internet outlets. Venezuela’s media ecosystem shrank further when the country’s economy collapsed after 2015. The aftermath of the 2017 cycle of protests saw another significant shift in the media landscape, with surviving newscasts characterized by censorship and heavily biased coverage in favor of the ruling party. In addition, censorship has caused the closure of many radio stations, leaving many areas without access to local or regional news. The National Telecommunications Commission in Venezuela routinely censors the use of certain topics and words during programming, and also bans interviews with democratic opposition leaders. It prohibits public coverage of corruption allegations or human rights violations attributed to state officials or their family members, coverage of citizen protests or demonstrations against the regime, and discussion of international courts and other human rights entities.

In their new report, “Venezuela: A playbook for digital repression,” Iria Puyosa, Andrés Azpúrua, and Daniel Suárez Pérez dive deep into the state of media in Venezuela, the role it played in the country’s slide toward authoritarianism, and whether other Latin American countries will adopt Venezuela’s model of digital repression.

Additional contributions by Marco Ruíz and Valentina Aguana

Edited by Iain Robertson and Andy Carvin

New Atlanticist Mar 13, 2024

Venezuela’s opposition is challenging Maduro in the next election. The only question is how.

By Geoff Ramsey

With leading candidate María Corina Machado barred from Venezuela’s July 28 presidential election, who will the opposition to Nicolás Maduro support?

Civil Society Elections

New Atlanticist Apr 18, 2024

Experts react: The US just reimposed sanctions on Venezuela. What does this mean for energy markets and Venezuela’s election?

By Atlantic Council experts

The United States will reimpose oil sanctions on Venezuela, faulting Nicolás Maduro’s government for failing to uphold the October 2023 Barbados Agreement.

Economic Sanctions Economy & Business

Report Aug 14, 2023

Protecting point-to-point messaging apps: Understanding Telegram, WeChat, and WhatsApp in the United States

By Iria Puyosa

A year-long project on protecting users’ data and privacy that analyzes the growing use of point-to-point messaging platforms in the United States and the implications their design and governing policies have for user privacy and free speech.

Civil Society Digital Policy

The Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) has operationalized the study of disinformation by exposing falsehoods and fake news, documenting human rights abuses, and building digital resilience worldwide.

learn more

This report was made possible with support from the government of Canada.

The post How Venezuela became a model for digital authoritarianism appeared first on Atlantic Council.

With an expected global population of 10 billion by 2050, the world must adjust to meet growing food demands. Changes to climate and geopolitical disruptions—from war and conflict to trade—have significant implications to food security. Only a few places in the world have the potential to rise to this occasion. Brazil is top of the list.

The post Infographic: Could Brazil be the future of global food security? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Unfortunately, this is a familiar scene for the region, which routinely battles the effects of extreme weather events and climate change. Hurricane Beryl once again spotlights why focusing on the mitigation of climate change, through such methods as cutting carbon emissions, alone is insufficient. Caribbean countries must prioritize climate adaptation as the primary mechanism to withstand hurricanes and other baked-in effects of climate change.

Climate adaptation is the answer to these extreme weather events, but it requires significant investment that governments in the Caribbean cannot afford. International support, including private finance, is needed. In five months, the United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties, also known as COP29, will take place in Baku, Azerbaijan. It has been dubbed the “finance COP,” and there governments and the private sector should come together and show the commercial utility of prioritizing climate adaptation. Doing so can unlock new financing and create project pipelines that are commercially attractive to global investors.

The Caribbean is often categorized as the world’s most vulnerable region to climate change. Seventy percent of the region’s population lives or works on the coast, meaning that storm surges from hurricanes affect businesses, lifestyles, and government operations. Hurricanes and strong storms also bring the tourism industry to a halt, disproportionately affecting the region’s tourism-dependent economies and severely slowing economic growth. Hurricane Maria in 2017 cost Dominica an estimated 225 percent of its gross domestic product, while Hurricane Irma in the same year cost Antigua and Barbuda more than $136 million in damages, of which the tourism industry represented 44 percent.

Strong storms damage critical infrastructure. Downed power lines cause widespread power outages, while flooded roads and bridges can prevent rescue operations. Already, Hurricane Beryl has caused power outages in Saint Lucia, and homes in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines have lost their roofs. And stronger storms lead to longer recovery periods, which can increase governments’ public debt as they borrow at high interest rates from multilateral institutions to rebuild after the storm has passed. Six years after Hurricane Maria, for example, citizens in Dominica are still rebuilding.

Withstanding strong storms and other effects of climate change requires new climate adaptation projects. For hurricanes with high wind speeds (such as Beryl, which sustained wind speeds of 150 mph at its peak), it is necessary to retrofit infrastructure to be resilient. To achieve this, governments need to require building codes for new homes and infrastructure that ensure sufficient resilience across structures. To brace for storm surges, governments need to move water and energy infrastructure underground where possible to avoid damage. New sea walls and flood protection systems also need to be built.

In all, the region needs more than $100 billion dollars in investment to meet its climate adaptation goals, but it has only been approved for less than one billion dollars from various climate funds. Governments are often left to fend for themselves, taking high-interest loans (due to the classification of many Caribbean nations as middle- and high-income economies by the World Bank) since they often do not qualify for concessional financing. At the same time, governments have borne the brunt of the responsibility because these types of climate adaptation projects are not always attractive to the private sector. Retrofitting infrastructure and other climate adaptation projects, for example, have high upfront costs with little return on investment.

COP29 is an opportunity to bring the public and private sector together to unlock new financing and advance climate adaptation projects. The private sector—both in the region and around the world—has access to needed technologies and has the capacity to undertake climate adaptation projects, from providing drainage on roads and bridges to help ease flash flooding to building decentralized energy grid infrastructure to limit widespread blackouts. Climate adaptation is, after all, in the private sector’s interest. If the effects of hurricanes and climate change worsen and the region’s economies slow, then businesses’ profits will be affected.

What will it take to get the private sector more involved? Attracting private sector participation requires regulatory reforms and carve outs by governments to ensure that companies yield a return on projects. Governments can provide incentives, such as giving exclusive benefits to companies participating in projects and providing subsidies or tax exemptions on materials used. Equally important is access to low-cost finance and capital. Governments can work with institutions such as IDB Invest and global donors that provide grant finance to funnel capital to companies undertaking long-term developments while engaging with insurance agencies that can underwrite riskier projects. 

Caribbean leaders have begun to explore private sector participation in climate adaptation projects, notably through the Bridgetown Initiative and the Blue Green Investment Corporation, but there is still work to be done. COP29 might well be the ideal forum to strengthen these initiatives and encourage commitments from governments and the business community. Doing so requires flexibility from both sectors and a focus on projects that are investment-friendly and can attract global donors. 

In the lead-up to COP29, governments will need to begin laying the regulatory groundwork and soliciting the required technical assistance from development institutions to encourage private sector participation. Moreover, Caribbean governments should consider adding or increasing the size of the private sector groups to their delegations for COP29 to ensure they have a seat at the table and are bought into any signed agreements. Building these public-private relationships can go a long way toward showing global donors and companies the viability of investing in climate adaptation projects in the Caribbean and unlock needed capital that can save lives in the long run.

Wazim Mowla is the associate director and fellow of the Caribbean Initiative at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

The post Hurricane Beryl spotlights the importance of climate adaptation in the Caribbean appeared first on Atlantic Council.

The success of Chinese economic diplomacy in Peru

In 2024, Peru’s relevance to China will be transformed, as Lima becomes a crucial partner in China’s economic engagement with Latin America. In November, Xi plans to inaugurate the Chancay port, a $3.6 billion deep-water mega-port forty-four miles north of Lima under exclusive operating rights by China’s state-owned COSCO. The port is set to reshape global trade between Asia and Latin America, reducing the travel time for shipping vessels between both countries by ten days. COSCO’s exclusivity over the port would make Chancay China’s first logistics hub in South America. Similarly, China Southern Power Grid’s ongoing acquisition of Italian Enel’s equity stakes in Lima’s electricity distribution will put 100 percent of Lima’s electricity in the hands of Chinese companies.

Beyond these two projects, Boluarte’s state visit to China follows a decade of increased Chinese economic influence in the Andean country. Between 2018 and 2023, Peru became the second highest recipient of Chinese foreign direct investment (FDI) in Latin America and the Caribbean, and the largest recipient of Chinese FDI in South America, standardized by gross domestic product.

Chinese investment has grown in Peru despite its political instability. From 2016 onward, the country has been entangled in an institutional and political crisis. With six presidents governing the country since 2016, Peru has been hardly able to offer any political stability to investors. As Chinese companies’ interests increase in an institutionally weaker Peru, it becomes essential for the Chinese government to secure support at the highest political level to shield its strategic investments from this instability. The state visit provides an example: In the months preceding the visit, both the Chancay port and China Southern Power Grid’s acquisition were scrutinized by Peru’s port and antitrust authorities, respectively. The National Port Authority even revoked COSCO’s exclusivity deal, which threatened to stymie China’s control over the port.

But after months of legal disputes, and upon the announcement of Boluarte’s state visit to China, the Peruvian government withdrew its request to revoke COSCO’s rights for Chancay, and China Southern Power Grid was able to finalize its acquisition, just days before the visit. Boluarte and her delegation even met with the presidents of COSCO and China Southern Power Grid during her trip to Beijing, demonstrating that the state visit was a successful tool of economic diplomacy for China.

What does the state visit mean for US economic diplomacy?

The United States should be concerned. Boluarte’s state visit represents the pinnacle of a successful economic engagement strategy between China and Peru that has resulted in deeper political ties between both countries. The projects that are the fruits of these deeper ties could directly counter US interests in the region.

The United States has already raised concerns over the Chancay port and the possibility that it could be used as a dual-use facility by the Chinese navy. US officials have also encouraged the Peruvian government to create a committee to vet foreign investment in strategic sectors, such as electricity, on national security grounds. But expressions of these US concerns haven’t yielded significant results. The limits of US diplomacy in Peru have much to do with its limited economic engagement with the country relative to China.

While the US-Peru free trade agreement doubled the trade volume between both countries in the fifteen years since its signing, US FDI represents about one-third of Chinese FDI in Peru, and Peruvians export five billion dollars more in goods to China than to the United States. And while the Peruvian government prides itself on its membership in the Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity—the Biden administration’s pillar of economic diplomacy toward Latin America—the framework will take time to deliver tangible trade and investment benefits that can rival China’s. As Peru is still looking to recover economically from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States can open doors for closer diplomacy with the country by working with it to foster economic growth.   

Why deeper collaboration between the US and Peru matters

As the US government seeks to expand and diversify supply chains away from China and advance its energy transition, it can benefit from increased collaboration with Peru, not least because of its mineral abundance. Peru is the second largest world producer of copper, and stands among the top producers for silver, lead, and zinc.

To compete with Chinese investment, US companies will have to participate in the bidding for large infrastructure projects and should present an alternative partner for building out Peru’s critical infrastructure, such as energy, port, or telecommunications infrastructure. For this to happen, Washington needs to better align the risk appetite of US investors and firms with Peru’s project and country risks. While the United States won’t model China’s state-led investment, agencies such as the International Development and Finance Corporation should collaborate more closely with the private sector to de-risk and incentivize US bids on infrastructure projects in Peru.

Deeper US economic engagement with Peru is also in Peruvians’ interests. The United States is the only global superpower interested in and capable of assisting the Peruvian political class to exit nearly a decade of institutional corrosion. US diplomacy toward Peru has rightfully focused on addressing the country’s democratic instability and political crisis, recognizing these issues as the country’s biggest challenges. The US government has encouraged Peruvian officials to respect the constitutional order and has expressed concern when they have deviated from it, such as when then President Pedro Castillo attempted a self-coup in December 2022.

When the Peruvian government abused its power in the demonstrations of January 2023, US representatives called out the government for its human rights violations. In March of this year, as Peru’s Congress sought to weaken the judiciary watchdog, the Junta Nacional de Justicia, US senators Ben Cardin and Tim Kaine publicly expressed their concern. It is no overstatement to say that Peruvian democracy is at risk, and the United States has been right to recognize its fragility. But the United States’ capacity to assist Peru in building out its institutions will yield very little unless its statements of concern are accompanied by economic tools that incentivize cooperation with the United States.

Martin Cassinelli is a program assistant in the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center at the Atlantic Council.

The post What the Peruvian president’s state visit to China means for US economic diplomacy appeared first on Atlantic Council.

• Introduction
• Severe consequences of energy insecurity
• Energy-transition barriers
• Applying the CEWG roadmap
• A global call to action
• Acknowledgments
• About the author
• About the Caribbean Energy Working Group Co-Chairs

Introduction

Countries in the Eastern Caribbean¹ are among the world’s most energy insecure nations. These countries grapple with high electricity costs that undercut economic competitiveness and growth, are heavily dependent on petroleum products, and are uniquely vulnerable to the effects of climate change. At the same time, a World Bank designation as middle- or high-income economies significantly limits access to concessional financing. The result is a slow transition to renewable energy power generation, including attracting commercial interest for the relevant infrastructure and unbundling utility systems that often stymie regulatory changes and curtail needed investments in the energy sector.

The time may be ripe for accelerating the pace of the transition in the Eastern Caribbean. A broad consensus exists among regional governments, the business community, and multilateral partners to further usher in a transition to renewable energy, given the unique vulnerabilities facing Eastern Caribbean countries. Meanwhile, countries in the Southern Caribbean (Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago, and Suriname) are leaning into their hydrocarbon reserves as they balance their own energy transition, while other countries are either attracting commercial interest or are far along in their renewable energy development relative to the Eastern Caribbean. Though there is an abundance of solar and wind power potential in the Eastern Caribbean—along with significant geothermal reserves in Dominica, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Saint Kitts and Nevis—countries in this region are faced with defining how a realistic, affordable, and just energy transition can take place and unlocking new private sector and multilateral resources.

The Atlantic Council’s Caribbean Initiative engaged in a series of consultations with the Caribbean Energy Working Group (CEWG), whose members identified two main constraints to the region’s transition: the top-down vertically integrated nature of state-owned utility systems; and limited access to low-cost financing and credit to governments and clean energy developers. While recognizing that an energy transition requires a holistic approach, CEWG members propose that the starting points must be addressing utility constraints and access to finance to ensure a reliable and resilient energy system transformation that is sustainable and affordable for consumers, governments, and the private sector in the Eastern Caribbean. An energy transition in the Eastern Caribbean must ensure reliable power to combat price volatility for consumers while energy infrastructure should be resilient to the effects of climate change, hurricanes and strong tropical storms, and rising temperatures.

The CEWG brings together up to fifteen policy and technical experts from across the Caribbean, and was first convened in 2023 by the Atlantic Council. This publication builds off the CEWG’s first report, “A roadmap for the Caribbean’s energy transition,” which was published last year and outlined a five-step process that governments, developers, and regional partners can undertake to facilitate an energy transition in the Caribbean. The five-step process includes: conducting energy modeling and analysis; modernizing energy grids; diversifying utility structures; creating bankable projects; and scaling project investment to national and subregional levels. This publication focuses on applying steps three and four of the roadmap.

The CEWG met as part of two roundtable discussions, followed by five one-on-one consultation sessions across the group to identify barriers and solutions to accelerating a reliable and resilient energy transition in the Eastern Caribbean. This publication serves as a complement to existing initiatives and projects dedicated to facilitating an energy transition, with the aim of raising additional awareness of the reality and the urgency of the moment for the world’s most vulnerable countries.

Severe consequences for energy insecurity

Countries in the Eastern Caribbean are open facing, small market economies, vulnerable to ebbs and flows of the global financial system. The region’s import dependence means that supply chain constraints and rising global interest rates have a disproportionate effect on these economies. For example, when Russia’s war in Ukraine stemmed the flow of fertilizer to agriculture commodity exporters, food inflation in the Eastern Caribbean skyrocketed and remained high even as prices eventually declined in industrialized nations.² And although the price of renewable energy, such as solar photovoltaic (PV) power, has declined dramatically over the past decade, capital and investment in this sector naturally gravitated to the bigger economies in the Global North.

Stronger storms, more outages
Climate change is a significant driver of the energy transition in the Eastern Caribbean. Hurricanes and strong tropical storms cause flash flooding and high wind speeds that damage energy infrastructure. Global warming, as a result of increasing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), is fueling stronger and more frequent tropical storms. The result is lost power for days and weeks, as was the case in 2017 when Hurricane Irma hit Antigua and Bermuda, damaging transmission lines and generators. Similarity, in 2019, Hurricane Dorian caused widespread power outages in Dominica.³

The makeup of these economies has resulted in Eastern Caribbean countries paying some of the highest electricity prices in the Americas, including double and sometimes triple of what the average consumer pays in the United States ($0.109 per 1 kilowatt-hour (KW/h).⁴ On average, consumer costs in Antigua and Barbuda ($0.367 per 1 KW/h) and Saint Kitts and Nevis ($0.333 per 1 KW/h) rank on the higher end of the spectrum, with Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ($0.185 per 1 KW/h) on the lower end, and the rest of the countries falling in between. These high costs coincide with an import dependence on petroleum products, with Antigua and Barbuda (100 percent), Dominica (92 percent), Grenada (93 percent), Saint Lucia (98 percent), Saint Kitts and Nevis (87 percent), and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (95 percent) all relying on fossil fuels to satisfy almost all of their energy demand.⁵ The cost of these imports account for almost 7 percent of the subregion’s gross domestic product, cutting into public expenditure needed to invest in climate adaptation projects and social sectors such as education and health services.⁶

High electricity prices and energy imports undercut the competitiveness of key economic sectors in the Eastern Caribbean—notably the hospitality sector—and limit the purchasing power of consumers. According to the Inter-American Development Bank, six of the countries prioritized in this publication rank in the global top ten of tourism-dependent economies.⁷ The tourism industry accounts for a significant share of energy demand in these countries, increasing the prices for hotel rooms due to high usage of air conditioning and lighting.⁸ Given that the tourism industry is an economic driver, high energy costs can make industries uncompetitive vis-à-vis other tourist hubs in the region such as Jamaica and the Dominican Republic. Beyond the tourism sector, more than a quarter of energy demand in the Eastern Caribbean is for residential use.⁹ High power bills can take up a large share of household income and decrease the purchasing power of individuals, leaving them unable to spend money on local products and services, like food and transportation, which help to stimulate economic growth.

Despite the challenges facing the Eastern Caribbean, bright spots exist. Renewable energy, such as solar, wind, and geothermal reserves, are abundant. Across the region, the sun shines more than 200 days annually,¹⁰ has an estimated potential of almost 70 gigawatts of available offshore wind (excluding Dominica), and (excluding Antigua and Barbuda) houses an estimated 6,290 megawatts (MW) of available geothermal reserves.¹¹ But this potential has not been tapped. Current installed capacity of renewable energy (as a percentage) stands at: Antigua (4 percent), Dominica (25 percent including hydroelectric power), Grenada (4 percent), Saint Lucia (3 percent), Saint Kitts and Nevis (5 percent), and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (17 percent including hydroelectric).

Geothermal development is a high priority in the Eastern Caribbean
Dominica has an estimated 1,390 MW of geothermal potential. The country’s small population and energy grid had not provided adequate incentive to develop that capacity, due to the high capital costs of exploring its geothermal reserves at scale- until recently. Commitment by the government in 2023 to develop its reserves and support this year from the World Bank have helped the country begin developing its geothermal potential. The World Bank is financing a new project at $38.5 million to support drilling of new geothermal wells and helping construct new transmission lines and substations to connect the future geothermal plants to consumers. Meanwhile, St. Kitts and Nevis is consistently looking for new partners to support its own geothermal ambitions for close to a decade, with a total project cost estimated at US $505 million. A mixture of bilateral and multilateral financing will be needed to bring this project closed to Dominica’s stage.¹²

Energy-transition barriers

The utility systems in the Eastern Caribbean are state-owned entities—excluding Saint Lucia, which has a public-private model—tasked with providing power to citizens. Tax revenues are used by governments to invest in critical and social services. These are top-down systems in vertically integrated structures, meaning that they single-handedly operate the generation, transmission, and distribution of power. This model can stifle innovation and competition, leaving customers without alternative choices and increasing the cost of electricity. Further, it means that introducing new clean energy technologies, when possible, must be financed and implemented by the utility, which is often devoid of the needed capital and technical assistance to act. Therefore, incorporating renewable energies into this model can be expensive—particularly since these technologies have high upfront costs. It is both a political and economic challenge that clean energy is not necessarily cheap energy.

However, unbundling utility systems is not a straightforward solution and not all state-owned entities are necessarily bad. Breaking these systems apart might divide consumer bases and may not lower the cost of electricity given the small size of Eastern Caribbean countries’ populations. Instead, as discussed below, the best-case scenario is to introduce innovation into the utility system, such as diversifying the utility structure across generation, distribution, and transmission by using public-private models. Maintaining an intact customer base is critical for utilities to keep the costs low for consumers while ensuring that utilities and the private-sector entities are still turning a profit. This does not mean that breaking up systems is the sole way to ensure low prices for renewable energy generation. Some markets, particularly in micro economies like in the Eastern Caribbean, might be too small to introduce competition and keep prices affordable. There is no one-size-fits-all solution, as changes in utility structures need to adapt to and be contextualized for each individual country.

Changing the business model of the utilities can help to create more incentives to incorporating renewable energy generation by factoring in the social cost externalities (the associated costs of fossil fuels on the broader public and society) of depending on fossil fuels as a realistic price comparison. Current models determine the price of electricity based on the cost of petroleum imports. But the emissions of fossil fuels—not just carbon dioxide but also other toxins that cause respiratory illnesses—increase cancer risks and, generally, overall poor health. The future healthcare costs for the consumer and the burden on governments to invest in adequate healthcare infrastructure are typically not added to the total cost of importing fossil fuels. If a full cost analysis and reformed business model are developed, then the price of importing fossil fuels might be higher than renewable power generation.

Commercial developers fund projects initially on their own before seeking to make projects bankable by obtaining loans that are backed by cash flow. Projects in the Eastern Caribbean take a long time to develop, given financing challenges due to unclear regulations and permitting, and a lack of investment-grade utility systems to guarantee payments under negotiated power purchasing agreements. Due to the long period of development, investors and governments look to derisk their projects by seeking full grants or convertible loan grants to help them clear these hurdles.

Commercial renewable energy projects also suffer from limited access to low cost and concessionary finance and capital. As discussed, state-owned utilities and governments are responsible for financing new renewable energy projects. These countries do not have the fiscal space or national budgets to self-finance these projects, leaving them to seek loans and grants from multilateral development banks (MDBs) and bilateral lenders. However, the World Bank classifies Eastern Caribbean countries as middle- and high-income economies, disqualifying them from accessing low-cost loans from the World Bank and those that also use this classification, such as the US Development Finance Corporation. This also applies to the business community and energy developers who need access to financing during the pre-project phase (prefeasibility studies, production of design drawings, and environmental social and impact assessments, among others).

Applying the CEWG roadmap

Addressing utility constraints and unlocking new access to finance and capital both are needed, but a well thought-out process that takes the context and nuances of each country into account is needed. To the international community, these countries are bound by their similarities (e.g., population and market size, and geographic location). Realistically, there are enough differences between them that suggest that no solution to the region’s energy transition challenges can be a one-size-fits-all approach. Each country’s context will determine how the below solutions are applied, from unbundling utility structures to attracting finance and capital based on renewable energy. While each country needs a transition that is contextualized to its own reality, technical assistance and transmission upgrades are at the core of the energy transition. Policy action and financial resources are both required, and Caribbean governments and regional institutions will need the assistance of partners like the US Trade and Development Agency and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) to deploy the assistance throughout the transition process.

Based on the small consumer bases and state-owned nature of utility systems in the Eastern Caribbean, unbundling utilities might not actually lower electricity costs. Instead, the structure of the utility might be reformed to a public-private partnership (PPP) model that also accounts for price comparisons between fossil fuel imports with social cost externalities attached to a transition to renewable energies. In essence, PPPs are a collaborative model that leverages the strengths of both the public and private sectors, which can help accelerate the deployment of renewable energy infrastructure while ensuring cost-effectiveness and financing sustainability. For example, needed transmission upgrades can be undertaken by governments to help absorb costs and prevent them from being passed to consumers. And the private sector can take responsibility for generation projects, driving down costs and improving competitiveness. Governments and utilities are still able to benefit from the revenue to use for public-sector investments while private-sector entities can streamline innovation in the energy sector, helping to attract more commercial interest.

Designing PPP models will be complex. Each country and its utility or utilities are unique. The challenge will be designing the appropriate model. Here, entities such as the IDB should work with the Caribbean Development Bank (CDB), and use input from private-sector companies in the region, to design a PPP model for utility structures. The IDB houses the experience and expertise in designing PPP models, and through its new One Caribbean program is already building a project preparation facility that can incorporate PPP designs into its model.¹³ The challenge is that Eastern Caribbean countries are not members of the IDB, though they are borrowing member countries of the CDB. In the past, the CDB and the IDB have worked together to streamline assistance to and analysis for the Eastern Caribbean. The same can be done here, with the added benefit of the CDB already understanding the nuances of each of the countries in the subregion.

However, designing and implementing a PPP model requires political will and government support. Governments might not be anxious to adopt renewables if the cost of the electricity does not lower prices—affecting key political constituents—and if accelerating an energy transition comes with increased public debt through high-interest loans. Simply put, a transition is only possible if governments are given assurances and feel comfortable that incorporating renewables will not affect their standing with their constituents, meaning that entities like the IDB, CDB, and partners, such as the United States, will have to secure government support before an energy transition can take place.

As utility systems are able to reform their models to ensure that renewable energy projects are affordable for governments and consumers, support to countries and investors is needed to finance projects through the project pipeline. As discussed in the CEWG’s first report, the projects in the Caribbean tend to fall in the “valley of death,” due to project delays ranging from limited site access to an inability to secure additional financing. Key to moving projects through the pipeline is to derisk them and ensure their bankability. Two steps are needed. First, Caribbean countries need access to the expertise and capacity to conduct feasibility studies, environmental social and impact assessments, and design power purchase agreements, among other things. Second, Eastern Caribbean countries need access to investment vehicles that prioritize grants or low-cost loans for the upfront costs of renewable energy projects. Entities like IDB Invest have pockets of financing that allows the institution to inject equity into projects, but the pool of funds is small relative to what is available for other countries or subregions in Latin America.

This is where regional partners like the United States and existing regional programs like the CARICOM Development Fund (CDF) and the Bridgetown Initiative¹⁴ should be utilized. The United States government, through the International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), should take advantage of the current DFC reauthorization process to create a carve out for clean energy projects in the region. The scale of investment is minimal compared to other DFC-financed projects and would have outsized effects in the small markets and grids in the Eastern Caribbean. This would take an act of the US Congress—particularly for a middle-income country exception—but there is precedent and increasing appetite to prioritize energy security in the Caribbean. Further, the United States should encourage the IDB and the CDB to work with the CDF and the Bridgetown Initiative to create a project pipeline (with attached equity investments available) to attract large-scale financing and grants from global donors. Capital and finance around the world are available if regional partners and entities are able to build mechanisms that streamline funding to energy projects in the Eastern Caribbean and build a project pipeline to attract commercial investors.

A global call to action

An energy transition in the Eastern Caribbean requires political will, regional coordination, and consistent technical assistance. Relative to the cost of the global energy transition, the needed capital in the Eastern Caribbean is minimal. But the tides are changing in the region, as more political actors and financial institutions are thinking creatively of how to accelerate an energy transition. Still, human capital and capacity limitations stifle the region’s ability to undertake this process alone. Partner governments like the United States and Canada have committed to the region’s energy security in the past few years, but these two countries do not have the funding or domestic political will to direct their attention consistently to the Eastern Caribbean. Addressing the climate crisis and facilitating a global energy transition is increasing in urgency each day, meaning that more actors across governments, international bodies, the business community, and foundations are unlocking new forms of support. Tapping into these resources will be critical. Regional governments and their partners need to continue raising the profile of the Eastern Caribbean and using regional and global platforms, from the Group of Twenty to the UN General Assembly to the COP29 climate talks in November to ensure that these countries are not left behind.

Acknowledgments

The Atlantic Council thanks board member Melanie Chen for her financial support of this publication and the corresponding working group. A thank you also goes to the CEWG members who joined the numerous one-on-one consultations and roundtables that informed this publication, including co-chairs David Goldwyn and Eugene Tiah. A special thank you goes to Jason Marczak, vice president and senior director of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, which houses the Caribbean Initiative, for his guidance and comments throughout the working group and during the drafting of this publication. Maite Gonzalez Latorre managed the production flow of this publication.

About the author

Staff

Wazim Mowla

Associate Director & Fellow, Caribbean Initiative

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Caribbean China

Wazim Mowla is the associate director and fellow of the Caribbean Initiative at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center. He leads the development and execution of the initiative’s programming, including the Financial Inclusion Task Force, the US-Caribbean Partnership to Address the Climate Crisis (PACC) 2030 Working Group, and the Caribbean Energy Working Group. Since joining the Council, Mowla has co-authored major publications on the strategic importance of sending US COVID-19 vaccines to the Caribbean, strategies to address financial derisking, and how the United States can advance new policies to support climate and energy resilience.

About the Caribbean Energy Working Group Co-chairs

David Goldwyn is president of Goldwyn Global Strategies, LLC (GGS), an international energy advisory consultancy, and chairman of the Atlantic Council Global Energy Center’s Energy Advisory Group. He is a globally recognized thought leader, educator, and policy innovator in energy security and extractive-industry transparency.

Eugene Tiah is a senior business executive with in-depth knowledge and more than forty years of experience in the oil and gas business within the United States and the Caribbean region. He is also the president and CEO of the Caribbean Energy Chamber.

Report May 31, 2024

PACC 2030 objectives: The road to implementation

By Wazim Mowla, Charlene Aguilera

The Atlantic Council organized a PACC 2030 Working Group and worked closely with governments, the business community, and civil society organizations to support the implementation of PACC 2030’s objectives.

Caribbean Climate Change & Climate Action

Report Mar 1, 2022

Financial de-risking in the Caribbean: The US implications and what needs to be done

By Jason Marczak, Wazim Mowla

This report identifies how the withdrawal of correspondent banking relations, otherwise known as de-risking, affects Caribbean economies, people, and US-Caribbean relations.

Americas Caribbean

Issue Brief Sep 20, 2022

PACC2030: Quick wins for a US-Caribbean partnership on climate and energy resilience

By Wazim Mowla, Riyad Insanally

PACC2030’s success is crucial for CARICOM countries and the United States, and it needs to deliver in the short term to generate confidence that the United States is committed to a sustainable partnership.

Caribbean Economy & Business

The Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center broadens understanding of regional transformations and delivers constructive, results-oriented solutions to inform how the public and private sectors can advance hemispheric prosperity.

Learn more

The post Accelerating the energy transition in the Eastern Caribbean appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On Monday, the US State Department released a new report that shines perhaps the strongest light yet on foreign governments’ human trafficking offenses.

Which governments are traffickers?

In 2019, the US Congress mandated that the State Department identify which governments have a policy or pattern of human trafficking. The new 2024 Trafficking in Persons Report (TIP Report) marks the fifth year the State Department has declared that governments exploit people in forced labor and sex trafficking. 

Over the last five years, the State Department has identified thirteen countries engaged in this human rights violation, and nine governments have been on the list for all five years. In the 2024 TIP Report, thirteen countries are listed as traffickers, including China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and Russia. Sudan earned a spot on the list for the first time.

It should surprise no one that governments are trafficking people. For most of recorded history, monarchs, czars, emperors, sultans, pharaohs, chiefs, and other tyrants advancing their empires, governments, and central committees have driven the slave trade. Today, these trafficking patterns vary by country. 

• China: In China, the government forces Uyghurs to work in commercial facilities in Xinjiang and compels laborers in its Belt and Road Initiative around the world. China’s unapologetic embrace of slavery caused a unanimous US Senate to pass the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, known as UFLPA, which bars the importation of slave-made goods into the United States. 

• Cuba: The fact that Cuba rakes in eight billion dollars annually from its Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) is stunning. What is worse is that Cuba forces medical workers into the program, and the government siphons off the workers’ earnings. Cuban victims have sued PAHO in US federal courts, and Cuba has drawn condemnation from the international community. At the State Department rollout event for the 2024 TIP Report, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken conferred a “Trafficking in Persons Hero Award” to Maria Werlau, an activist fighting back against Cuba’s record of trafficking.

• Eritrea: In Eritrea, the government forces the poor and vulnerable into extended terms of compelled government service. Those with resources and connections can avoid government-forced labor.

• Turkmenistan: The government of Turkmenistan continues the old Soviet practice of forcing individuals to harvest cotton. The reforms by its neighbor Uzbekistan, which drastically reduced state-sanctioned forced labor in the cotton harvest—from 2.5 million victims in 2007 to eradicating forced labor in 2022—provide a helpful comparison. While Uzbekistan’s reforms have caused the Cotton Campaign and major fashion brands to lift their self-imposed ban on Uzbek cotton, the government of Turkmenistan has refused to use free, market-based laborers in its cotton harvest.

Typical interventions do not apply

The UN provides an estimate of 3.9 million state-sanctioned trafficking victims, and the TIP Report lists the offending countries. Yet, the world needs a plan to address this aspect of the human trafficking crisis. When dealing with individual traffickers or organized crime, the typical interventions include encouraging countries to increase victim identification, investigations, prosecutions, and convictions. To care for survivors, governments and civil society organizations must provide tailored services that appreciate the trauma traffickers inflicted. None of these interventions make sense when the government is the bad guy. It is absurd to ask Afghanistan or Burma to investigate itself or to hold itself accountable. 

The path forward

Those focused on foreign policy and the plight of those whom governments abuse must find a new path forward. Interventions that may work to incentivize governments to cease enslaving people include:

• Transparency and reporting: Exposing these abuses globally could motivate some countries to abandon forced labor. The TIP Report itself, along with other government and civil society reports, is an effort to shed light on these abuses.

• Banning tainted products: Several countries are attempting to block slave-made goods from entering their markets. The United States, for example, relies on the Tariff Act and the new UFLPA. The European Union is poised to enact a new law banning all products made with forced labor from its markets this year.  

• Sanctions: Countries can target individuals, companies, or other governments by imposing financial penalties, freezing assets, or refusing visas for engaging in forced labor. Global Magnitsky Act sanctions focus on human rights violators; the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act restricts Iran, North Korea, and Russia’s movement of money; and the TIP Report’s Tier 3 sanctions focus on countries that are not making significant efforts to meet antitrafficking minimum standards. While the effectiveness is debatable, many agree that the more narrowly targeted the sanctions, the more likely these efforts are to produce change.

• Private sector incentives and disincentives: The private sector is often more agile than bureaucrats striving for change. The large fashion brands that pledged not to use Uzbek cotton made a significant impact when a reform-minded leader took to the helm of Uzbekistan’s government. Likewise, companies operating or sourcing from a country can engage in commercial diplomacy by building coalitions and using their investment to demand reforms. While public justice systems are central to stopping criminal traffickers, addressing state-sanctioned human trafficking requires foreign policy and advocacy solutions. The millions of people oppressed by their governments need people of goodwill to create new initiatives that shift exploitative government policies into processes that bring freedom. 

John Cotton Richmond is a nonresident senior fellow at the Scowcroft Strategy Initiative of the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security. He served as the US ambassador to monitor and combat trafficking in persons from 2018 to 2021. Follow him on X, formerly Twitter, @JohnRichmond1.

The post How to stop governments from trafficking people appeared first on Atlantic Council.

The post Dollar Dominance Monitor featured by Reuters on BRICS de-dollarization efforts appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Compared to last year’s economic free-fall, Argentina’s situation is indeed looking up. President Javier Milei and his team have embarked on a serious fiscal adjustment initiative and are making a determined effort to bring inflation down from record levels. These policies have met with considerable early success, but the austerity measures needed to reduce the fiscal deficit have led to massive social disruption and serious street protests against the government.

Despite these early achievements, the real issues facing Argentina remain low productivity, a weak growth outlook, and large external financing needs in the foreseeable future. Together, they call into question whether Argentina will be able to crawl out from under its large debt burden and access markets to obtain fresh financing beginning in 2025, as projected by the latest IMF staff report. This forecast corresponds to an exceedingly optimistic scenario, in which continued reforms lead to an improvement in Argentina’s twin deficits, culminating in a strong pickup in capital flows in the medium term.

In reality, it is more likely that the reform momentum will be slowed by hardening opposition in the National Congress of Argentina, in particular in the Senate, where Peronist provincial governments still hold sway. Further exchange rate depreciation, the lack of a strong rebound in labor markets, and accumulating pain from continued austerity will also impair Milei’s hopes of gaining a parliamentary majority of his own during next year’s midterm elections.

A drubbing at the polls could throw Argentina back to square one. Both of the last two governments were hobbled by weak election outcomes halfway through their presidents’ terms. Despite Milei’s popularity with a large part of the Argentinian public, failure to array Congress behind his movement could again leave Argentina with a lame duck government and a half-completed reform agenda.

In such a situation, the envisaged liberalization, if not outright dollarization, of Argentina’s exchange rate regime—which still seems to be one of the president’s key objectives—is bound to fail. The country would need a strong and growing economy to sustain the kind of fiscal discipline that is required for a stable exchange rate regime, and this will not be possible without deep changes to Argentina’s economic laws and structure, starting with the government’s own footprint.

Such changes require a societal consensus toward market-friendly reforms, but also toward the appropriate distribution of incomes in case growth takes off. In Argentina, such middle ground between radical reform and government largesse has been elusive for decades, and it is unlikely to be found unless the main political camps are prepared to compromise.

Without dismissing this possibility outright, it is much more likely that the economic hardship currently experienced by ordinary Argentineans will drive voters back toward the main opposition party. The Peronist party will, without doubt, promise large handouts to core constituencies that abandoned them during the last elections, frustrated by high inflation and rising unemployment. And as the economic environment is stabilizing, many voters will have forgotten who was responsible for Argentina’s precarious situation in the first place.

The IMF should therefore remain cautious in its discussions with the current government. The institution was wrong to lower its standards for the current program, which granted Argentina a fairly easy restructuring of its repayment terms, an operation that is in principle ruled out by the IMF’s own statutes. Going forward, the fund should be leery of granting Argentina fresh money, digging itself even deeper into a hole that is already threatening to upend its own balance sheet (and possibly imposing losses on shareholders whose per-capita income is still below Argentina’s).

Instead, any new relationship with Argentina should be based on conditionality that ensures sustained growth and the eventual repayment of Argentina’s debt. As it failed to do in 2022, the IMF should insist that both political camps sign on to a meaningful reform program. Otherwise, it risks a reprise of the Macri experience, when IMF funds provided the incumbent government with a financial war chest to support its reelection which the next opposition-led government did not feel obliged to repay when it came to power.

Martin Mühleisen is a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center and a former IMF official with decades-long experience in economic crisis management and financial diplomacy.

The post Milei’s biggest challenge is to foster the societal consensus that Argentina needs to thrive appeared first on Atlantic Council.

The statement released by G7 leaders after their summit last week garnered ample attention for its strong language on China’s unfair economic practices and ongoing support for Russia’s war on Ukraine, and triggered a predictably sharp Chinese response. The back-and-forth is another reminder of China’s worsened relations with developed democracies over the past few years.

Beijing is by no means abandoning those relationships – Premier Li Qiang’s visit to Australia and New Zealand this week, not to mention President Xi’s trip to Europe last month, underscore a drive to mend damaged ties. But the incident is another piece of evidence confirming that Beijing’s positions on global and economic issues receive a more welcoming reception in the developing world, where China’s economic and political ties are growing by the day.

China’s strategic shift toward greater focus on the so-called Global South is unmistakable. One need only look at where China is spending diplomatic attention and propaganda dollars.

As colleagues at the Digital Forensics Research Lab explore in a new report on China’s messaging in Africa, China is increasingly promoting pro-Russian narratives about Ukraine in sub-Saharan Africa using its media platforms, commentators, social media, and broadcasting infrastructure. The effort aims to portray China as a force for peace while the United States prolongs the war, in line with Beijing’s drive to enhance its reputation relative to Washington across the developing world.

This effort to shape perceptions of China’s responsible global role in contrast to the United States is now routinely reflected in the content of high-level diplomatic engagements with developing countries.

In his speech just last week at the BRICS Dialogue with Developing Countries in Russia, Foreign Minister Wang Yi not only underscored China’s leadership of the Global South as the “largest developing country” but also called for the convening of “a true international peace conference” on the Ukraine war that involves Russia – after Beijing pulled out all the stops to try to scuttle the Swiss-organized conference earlier this month – and threw in some choice words on US efforts to “maintain its unipolar hegemony” for good measure.

As I and the Global China Hub team discovered on a trip to Brazil, Colombia, and Honduras earlier this month, China is also ramping up diplomatic, economic, and technological engagement across Latin America, and pairing those efforts with a push to shape understanding of China across the region. Our editor-in-chief Tiff Roberts dives into that and much more in this issue of Global China – take it away, Tiff!

-David O. Shullman, Senior Director, Atlantic Council Global China Hub

Fellow

Dexter Tiff Roberts

Nonresident Senior Fellow

Global China Hub Indo-Pacific Security Initiative

China Chinese

Latin American officials flood Beijing revealing China’s global priorities

Want to know one key region of the Global South China is now focusing on? Take a look at who visited Beijing in early June. Before the first week of the month was even over, Brazil’s Vice President Geraldo Alckmin, Venezuela’s Foreign Minister Yván Gil, and special envoy of Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel and Minister of Foreign Affairs Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla had all passed through China’s capital (the Brazilian vice president met with Xi Jinping and secured $4.49 billion in credit concessions. Brazil has been a key market for China too, as evidenced by an eighteen-fold surge in Chinese EV sales by value).

Latin America, with its rich resources, is a key target as China expands its global economic and political reach, and that’s a concern for the US. Testifying before the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission hearing “Key Economic Strategies for Leveling the U.S.-China Playing Field: Trade, Investment, and Technology,” Pepe Zhang of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center called for a development-focused economic partnership with LAC that would make the Western Hemisphere more competitive, resilient, and better integrated with the US.

Economics used to bolster authoritarian power in Global South training

China’s commerce ministry isn’t just fretting about EU tariffs (see below). It has also spearheaded an effort to train officials in countries across the Global South. And perhaps not surprisingly, the instruction is about more than trade and economics: “This effort is integral to the PRC’s drive to transform a global order currently predicated on the centrality of democracy and individual rights to one more “values-agnostic” and thus suited to China’s rise under authoritarian CCP rule,” writes the Global China Hub’s Niva Yau in a June 12 report called “A Global South with Chinese Characteristics” (watch the launch event here). The 795 training descriptions reviewed by Yau show “how the PRC marries economics and politics in its trainings, revealing that Chinese economic achievements are used to support authoritarian ideals.”

The report certainly got the PRC’s attention. The Chinese Embassy responded, saying the report is “full of Cold War mentality and ideological prejudice,” with the Foreign Ministry adding that “China has always respected the peoples of all countries in independently choosing their development paths and social systems,” which is very reassuring.

A new, coordinated transatlantic response to China emerges on trade?

In a widely expected move, the European Union announced new tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles on June 12, up as much 38.1% on top of existing taxes of 10% before, affecting companies including BYD, SAIC, and NIO. Also to no surprise was the heated response from Beijing: the move by the EU “undermines the legitimate rights and interests of China’s EV industry,” and is “blatant protectionism,” Ministry of Commerce spokesperson He Yadong said in a press briefing. On June 17, Beijing officially launched an anti-dumping probe on imported pork and its by-products from the EU in response.

With the EU action coming just over a month after US President Joe Biden imposed tariffs on EVs of 100%, is a new, more coordinated transatlantic response to the Chinese trade juggernaut emerging? On June 3rd, in an ACFrontPage conversation with United States Trade Representative Katherine Tai, she did not mince words on how the US and the EU should adapt the transatlantic trade relationship to reflect the realities of China’s economic system, saying “Capitalism with Chinese characteristics… I haven’t heard that term used in many, many years. At this point, I think it’s less diplomatic than just sort of ahistorical. The China that we’re dealing with now, the PRC, is not a democracy. It’s not a capitalist, market-based economy.”

In an Econographics article exploring a similar theme entitled “Biden’s electric vehicle tariff strategy needs a united front,” the GeoEconomics Center’s Sophia Busch and Josh Lipsky write, “tariffs, working in isolation, can’t fully achieve all the objectives—no matter how high they go. It’s only when tariffs are relatively aligned across countries… that the trajectory could change.”

And it’s not just EVs that pose a threat to global industries. Without tariffs, the EU faces a flood of Chinese imports of the “new three” clean tech exports—lithium-ion batteries, solar panels, and, of course, electric cars (along with the action against EVs, the White House also raised tariffs simultaneously on lithium-ion batteries and solar cells to 25%.) “Imports of the new-three cleantech export categories have skyrocketed in recent years. Over the course of 2023, China’s exports to the EU totaled $23.3 billion for lithium-ion batteries, $19.1 billion in solar panels, and $14.5 billion for electric vehicles,” the Global Energy Center’s Joseph Webster wrote in a piece for EnergySource.

• Beginning on June 17, Atlantic Council President and CEO Fred Kempe and former President of Latvia Egils Levits have co-led the Atlantic Council’s annual delegation trip to Taiwan, hosted by the Taiwanese government. Joined by former Czech Minister of Foreign Affairs Tomáš Petříček, they will meet with Taiwan government leaders, including President Lai, think tanks, and business representatives to discuss security and economic issues facing Taiwan and the Indo-Pacific.
• The Global China Hub hosted a public conversation on allied solutions to de-risking tech supply chains from Chinese investment to spur collective action between the United States and government and private sector partners in Europe and the Indo-Pacific. The event was a continuation of the Hub’s work on tech competition and China’s drive to dominate emerging technologies and relevant supply chains.
• China’s trade with Russia has risen substantially since the Kremlin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, significantly bolstering Moscow’s war aims, according to new research by the Global Energy Center’s Joseph Webster.
• Xi Jinping’s recent visit to Europe was in part intended to divide it as the EU increasingly hardens its stance on China. The Global China Hub’s Zoltán Fehér explores the degree to which Xi was successful in these efforts in a New Atlanticist piece.

Global China Hub

The Global China Hub researches and devises allied solutions to the global challenges posed by China’s rise, leveraging and amplifying the Atlantic Council’s work on China across its 16 programs and centers.

Explore more

The post Global China Newsletter – Sharp words, sharper tools: Beijing hones its approach to the Global South appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Sign up for PowerPlay, the Atlantic Council’s bimonthly newsletter keeping you up to date on all facets of the energy transition.

Mexico’s nearshoring opportunity

Mexico features prominently in US ambitions to “nearshore,” whereby companies move their production facilities closer to home and away from far-flung industrial hubs—mainly China. This shift is influenced by the United States’ drive to build more resilient supply chains in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and heightened geopolitical competition with China.

Cross-border economic ties under the United States-Mexico-Canada (USMCA) free trade zone are growing. The United States and Mexico are now each other’s largest trading partner. This can be attributed to many factors, including a deteriorating trade relationship between the United States and China, which reinforces the argument for nearshoring.

Mexico presents a supply chain opportunity for the United States. But from the Mexican perspective, support for nearshoring is relatively subdued. The “national project” of AMLO and Sheinbaum’s Morena party emphasizes combatting inequality including by developing the country’s south and strengthening state-owned companies. By contrast, the bulk of nearshoring investments would be made by private companies and go toward Mexico’s industrialized north, along the US border. Perhaps as a result, nearshoring has not progressed as rapidly as many predicted. US investors will need to align with Sheinbaum’s agenda to build a Mexican energy system capable of turning nearshoring into a reality.

Is nearshoring even happening?

A closer look at investment data paints a mixed picture of nearshoring. On one hand, foreign direct investment (FDI) in Mexico—the only measure of whether investment in the country is rising—reached a record $20.3 billion in the first quarter (Q1) of 2024, a 9 percent increase over Q1 2023. Fifty-two percent of total FDI in Mexico originated from the United States. On the other hand, only 3 percent of this increase can be attributed to new investments, contradicting the narrative that large-scale nearshoring is occurring. Furthermore, manufacturing as a share of Mexico’s economy grew to only 21 percent in the first half of 2023, from a pre-pandemic level of 20 percent. Tesla, which in March 2023 announced one of the largest nearshoring projects, has yet to break ground on its facility in Nuevo León. Like other investors, Tesla has encountered rising costs and logistical challenges.

Grid constrains are stifling nearshoring

Nearshoring is being limited by structural issues faced by Mexico’s electricity sector. Mexico’s grid has struggled to keep up with rising demand. The country suffers an “energy deficit,” facing difficulty connecting new manufacturing plants to the grid and—by extension—to renewable energy sources. The latter is a potential sticking point for electric vehicle producers looking to relocate to Mexico such as Tesla, GM, and Ford. The Mexican Association of Private Industrial Parks notes that this issue has postponed some projects and has throttled nearshoring in the years since the pandemic.

Is Mexico’s electricity sector a constraint?

The fragility of Mexico’s grid presents another major nearshoring obstacle. This was made clear in early May 2024 when the electricity demand on the grid nearly exceeded the total available generating capacity, leading the national electric system operator, CENACE, to declare a state of emergency. It has been reported that much of this demand can be attributed to the rising use of air conditioning and electric cooling during a record-breaking, weeks-long heatwave. As Mexico gets hotter courtesy of climate change, demand for cooling technologies—particularly for industrial processes—is set to rise.

Mexico’s electricity sector needs to shape up to meet increased demand from nearshoring.

More competition is needed—US investors can help

Mexico’s electricity sector offers a promising path for the United States to align its nearshoring objectives with Sheinbaum’s agenda. But to do so, it must benefit state-owned companies and free up state funds for social programs aimed at reducing inequality.

Increased private sector participation in the electricity sector is a necessity for achieving greater capacity and connectivity to unlock nearshoring. One analysis from the National Autonomous University of Mexico argues that increasing private sector participation in the electricity sector would not displace the state-owned electricity company CFE, which controls 40 percent of Mexico’s electric generation capacity, produces 70 percent of its power with private partners, and controls the full transmission and distribution network of the national grid.

In fact, CFE could benefit from increased industrial demand driven by nearshoring. Increasing private sector involvement in power generation can even help CFE by freeing it to investment in other areas, such as upgrading its transmission and distribution network and strengthening its balance sheet in the long term.

New president, new opportunities

AMLO has tried to strengthen CFE by passing a measure in 2021 to discriminate against private sector electricity generation and negate the 2013 Electricity Industry Law, which was designed to promote competition in the sector. Although the measure has since been overturned by the Supreme Court, the administration has effectively halted new public auctions for independent power contracts, preventing growth in private sector investment. Despite this, the private sector drove the increase in solar and wind power from 2014-2020.

Reversing course on private investment will be critical to restoring and expanding the capacity of the electric system and lowering costs. In 2019, independent power producers generated electricity 35 percent cheaper than CFE.

Sheinbaum’s election may present an opportunity for greater private sector collaboration with the United States. Facilitating investment can both strengthen Mexico’s grid and bolster the Mexican state, outcomes that are in line with Morena’s socioeconomic justice goals. While Sheinbaum will likely continue to favor state-owned companies, the Wall Street Journal reports that she also aims to “attract billions of dollars in private investment for solar and wind farms, with the government keeping control and a majority share in the electricity market,” citing a close advisor to Sheinbaum.

How the US-Mexico partnership can boost nearshoring and the electricity sector

The United States should seize the opportunity to work with the incoming Sheinbaum administration to strengthen the Mexican energy sector, thereby enabling supply chain security gains through nearshoring. The relationship should uphold the mutually beneficial tenets of the USMCA, including its level playing field for private sector investment.

In addition, the United States should redouble its technical and regulatory cooperation efforts with Mexican electricity regulators as has been conducted through the U.S. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). The aim of this partnership should be to work toward goals which benefit the Mexican administration’s agenda while strengthening economic ties and boosting Mexico’s manufacturing potential.

US-Mexico cooperation on electricity sector regulation can facilitate private sector investment in generation that could decrease the burden on CFE as the sole entity responsible for expanding the grid. Ceding greater financing responsibility to the private sector—with CENACE retaining control of the national electric system—could enable CFE to expand its business alongside the private sector and permit the Mexican state to focus on investments that promote increased prosperity for all its citizens.

With higher private sector participation conducted in a manner that respects the central role state-owned companies play in Mexican society, the electricity sector in Mexico can be transformed into an enabler of the nearshoring trend.

William Tobin is an assistant director with the Atlantic Council Global Energy Center.

EnergySource

EnergySource is the Global Energy Center’s (GEC) online publication providing commentary and analysis on developments in the energy and climate sector from a wide-array of thought leaders, politicians, and experts.

Read more

Staff

William Tobin

Assistant Director

Global Energy Center

Africa China

EnergySource Feb 24, 2023

Lula is back. Are Brazil’s climate credentials?

By Lizi Bowen, Maia Sparkman, William Tobin

Lula’s return to office in Brazil heralded a renewed commitment to environmental stewardship. But steps must be taken to ensure that renewal becomes as concrete and effective as possible.

Brazil Climate Change & Climate Action

Blog Post Feb 22, 2024

How to finance net zero in developing economies: Beyond the existing investment framework

By Ken Berlin, Frank Willey

The IEA’s recent analysis concludes that the world is on a path to achieve only one-third of the necessary reductions to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees C by 2030. The establishment of a new financing structure that catalyzes private investment in developing countries through innovative financing guarantees is crucial for achieving ambitious carbon reduction goals.

Climate Change & Climate Action Energy Markets & Governance

EnergySource Jul 11, 2022

Climate and energy at the US-Mexico bilateral summit

By David L. Goldwyn, Neil Robert Brown, Andrea Clabough

Energy and climate issues will feature heavily when Mexico’s president visits the White House this week. President Biden faces the tough task of fostering greater cooperation while asserting US demands for treaty compliance and a free and fair energy market.

Americas Energy & Environment

The Global Energy Center develops and promotes pragmatic and nonpartisan policy solutions designed to advance global energy security, enhance economic opportunity, and accelerate pathways to net-zero emissions.

learn more

The post US-Mexico energy cooperation is vital to enable nearshoring appeared first on Atlantic Council.

• Introduction
• Training future authoritarians
• Party governance as the root of all success
• Global implications and recommendations
• Dataset of Chinese government files

Introduction

At the peak of China’s economic growth toward the end of the 2010s, Beijing began to advocate for an alternative model of governance that prioritizes economic development and rejects the centrality of the protection of individual rights and “Western” democratic processes. At the heart of this new push to legitimize authoritarian governance was the example of China’s own remarkably rapid economic development under Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership and an implicit assertion that such successful growth legitimizes not only China’s own autocratic system, but also other non-democratic political systems. The global implications of this development have grown clearer as Beijing has embarked on a steadily expanding mission to promote its political system alongside its economic success in countries across the Global South.

As early as 1985, Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping explained, in plain language, that the Chinese political system would resist changes despite economic integration with the world. He told the Tanzanian president at the time, “Our reform is an experiment not only in China but also internationally, and we believe it will be successful. If we are successful, it can provide some experience for developing countries.”¹ In 2017, a new Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, repeated this sentiment using similar language.

The path, the theory, the system, and the culture of socialism with Chinese characteristics have kept developing, blazing a new trail for other developing countries to achieve modernization. It offers a new option for other countries and nations who want to speed up their development while preserving their independence; and it offers Chinese wisdom and a Chinese approach to solving the problems facing mankind.”

Source: “Full Text of Xi Jinping’s Report at 19th CPC National Congress,” Xinhua, November 4, 2017, https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/19thcpcnationalcongress/2017-11/04/content_34115212.htm.

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has long pursued foreign acceptance of Chinese political narratives and encouraged their adoption to further China’s interests.² However, China typically does not need to cajole countries into accepting its messaging about successful development. Many developing country leaders, having witnessed the Chinese “economic miracle” in which it developed at a remarkable pace after first opening its economy to the world in the late 1970s, take seriously China’s narrative about the benefits of a more authoritarian system and are willing to consider the calculated risk of experimenting with what Beijing is offering. Even as China’s economic growth has slowed significantly and its political system has grown more repressive under Xi, the number of countries welcoming Chinese governance lessons continues to grow, enhancing Beijing’s global influence. This has significant implications for the future of democracy, the protection of individual rights, and the nature of the global order.

Training future authoritarians

One of the most direct ways that Beijing promotes authoritarian governance is through training programs for foreign government officials on Chinese governance practices. This report investigates a new dataset of Chinese government files on such trainings, uncovering how Beijing uses these sessions to directly promote ideas and practices that marry economics and politics to make a case for its authoritarian capitalism model. Beyond encouraging sympathy for Chinese narratives among officials across the Global South, the programs also provide practical assistance for host countries to fast-track adaptation of Chinese practices. The sessions also appear to serve intelligence-collection purposes by requiring each participant to submit reports detailing their prior exchanges and engagements with other foreign countries on specific training subjects. This report outlines the content Beijing teaches officials in various developing countries and the anticipated benefits to Beijing from these programs. It also explains how these initiatives fit into China’s broader ambitions to undermine the liberal democratic norms that currently underpin the global order.

The author obtained 1,691 files from the Chinese Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) containing descriptions of 795 governmental training programs delivered (presumably online) in 2021 and 2022 during the pandemic. Each program description contains a title indicating the subject of training; the name of the Chinese entity subcontracted to deliver the training; the timing and language of instruction; invited countries and regions; group size; the professional background and demographic requirements for trainees; and training program objectives. Additionally, each description included an outline of the training content, including names of instructors and contact information for subcontracted entities.

In 1981, Beijing began delivering training programs, first branded as foreign assistance, in coordination with the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) as part of an effort to provide aid and basic skills to developing countries.³ In 1998, the Chinese government broke away from that cooperation arrangement and began offering its own centrally planned training programs directly to governmental officials from countries across the Global South. Beijing reportedly hosted 120,000 trainees from the Global South between 1981 and 2009, with 4,000 programs across twenty fixed areas. With initial success, the programs expanded from their original objective and the number of trainees increased in the next decade, with 49,148 trainees in 1,951 programs between 2010 and 2012, and more than 200,000 trainees in around 7,000 programs between 2013 and 2018.⁴

Evidence in the newly obtained 2021 and 2022 files indicates that the objectives of Chinese governmental training programs for foreign officials have changed significantly. Trainings are no longer foreign assistance programs with primarily humanitarian assistance aims, but clearly serve to directly inject narratives that marry authoritarian governance with economic development—in other words, to promote an autocratic approach to governance.

According to a cross reference of public releases, the current protocol of governmental training programs involves receiving foreign officials sent to mainland China in accordance with bilateral agreements.⁵ These training programs focus on specific areas, and are centrally planned by the Chinese government with designated regional quotas.⁶ A review of these ”specific areas“ also shows that these programs differ from trainings on humanitarian aid, foreign assistance, and basic skills that Beijing delivered in cooperation with UNDP in the 1980s and 1990s. Rather, the trainings offer authoritarian principles in areas such as law enforcement, journalism, legal issues, space technologies, and many other topics. Given that in China, law enforcement is designed to protect the state and the Party rather than the people, journalism is prescribed to create national unity rather than act as a check against the system, and the law is intended to protect the regime rather than its citizenry, these training programs naturally offer foreign officials different lessons than they would receive from democratic countries.

According to the files obtained, the Chinese embassy in a country identified for training typically is notified roughly three months before a training program is expected to be hosted, and the relevant desk at the Chinese embassy is tasked with selecting and inviting targeted individuals in the host country. For example, the Chinese Ministry of Public Security attaché at the embassy would be responsible for inviting local law-enforcement representatives to join programs organized by the Chinese Ministry of Public Security. At least eleven Chinese government ministries and Party departments have delivered training programs to foreign government officials in the past three years, including the Ministry of Commerce, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Science and Technology, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Ecology and Environment, Ministry of Culture and Tourism, National Health Commission, Ministry of Emergency Management, International Liaison Department, and Ministry of Public Security.⁷ According to the files, within each of these Chinese ministries and departments, an “international cooperation and exchange” office then coordinates to subcontract the delivery of the training program to a hosting entity, often with a quasi-civilian Chinese entity with extensive ties to the government. The MOFCOM files show that the 795 training programs were subcontracted to 111 hosting entities in 2021 and 2022.

Given the vast number of Chinese ministries and departments found to have provided trainings to foreign government officials in the past few years, it is reasonable to conclude that these programs were not paused during the pandemic but simply moved to an online format. A review of the 795 descriptions shows that 21,123 individuals participated in online training programs that were provided by MOFCOM in 2021 and 2022. These programs were centered on lectures and included relevant virtual site visits. They ranged from one to 60 days in length: 42 percent of all programs were between twelve and fourteen days, and 34 percent were between 19 and 21 days. Program size was between 15 and 60 participants, and 68 percent of the programs were designed for 25 participants. Based on the training description, nearly all the programs targeted developing countries.

Because this research dataset was limited to program-description files from the MOFCOM, there remain obvious blind spots to understanding the full scope and depth of Chinese governance-export training programs for foreign governmental officials. However, precisely because the dataset here concerns those trainings delivered by the MOFCOM, examination of the files permits unique insights into how the PRC marries economics and politics in its trainings, revealing that Chinese economic achievements are used to support authoritarian ideals.

This report maps the governance practices Beijing is promoting in countries across the Global South. It does not attempt to examine the effectiveness of these efforts, which is outside the scope of this project. Follow-on research endeavors involving local experts will be necessary for exploration of individual governments’ receptivity to PRC narratives and practices, which is likely determined by a mix of local interests and political contexts.

Party governance as the root of all success

Chinese training programs focused specifically on governance practices have traditionally been implemented by the International Liaison Department (ILD), an agency under the Central Committee of the CCP whose core function is party-to-party diplomacy. In its political engagement with other countries’ political parties, the ILD has long conducted training sessions on Chinese governance to promote CCP ideology, with the stated intent to conduct “state governance experience exchange [治国理政经验交流].” Initially such trainings were held exclusively between the CCP and countries with one-party rule or corresponding Leninist party structures, such as Vietnam.⁸ This is no longer the case. The ILD training sessions have expanded to include sessions in non-communist and non-authoritarian countries. At the same time, other entities in the Chinese government have begun conducting their own “state governance experience exchanges.” In the late 2000s, similar language on “state governance experience exchange” began to surface in foreign policy documents describing engagements with developing regions and countries, including Latin America in 2008, Kazakhstan in 2009, Laos and Myanmar in 2010, and Mongolia in 2011,⁹ demonstrating the expanded reach of Chinese governance training sessions.

Since then, each training, no matter the subject, has contained language on CCP ideology and organization and related contributions to the PRC’s achievements in that subject area. In this way, authoritarian governance choices are being promoted even in the most niche of subject areas.

Even programs on seemingly innocuous topics like beekeeping, bamboo forestry, meteorology, or low-carbon development all begin by briefing participants about the Chinese reform and guiding management principles raised at the latest plenary sessions of the Party committee. The programs highlight where successful tactics for poverty alleviation or pandemic management originated, and then relate these principles to the technical subject areas being covered. This approach is employed to maintain consistency of narrative delivery to a variety of audiences. In the program descriptions obtained, targeted foreign government officials range from the highest political level to the technocratic level, and from senior-level directorships to junior staff members of departments working on political affairs, the economy, education, agriculture, science, and more.

According to a review of the 795 training descriptions obtained in the course of this research project, MOFCOM trainings cover a vast variety of topics, including trade-related areas such as port management, international application of BeiDou (the Chinese global navigation satellite system), and blockchain and information security technologies. However, despite MOFCOM’s remit, it also provides training on topics that do not seem immediately related to trade, such as the role of think tanks for implementing the Belt and Road Initiative, national policy on ethnic minorities, new-media affairs, population management and development, university management, governance practices for presidential advisers, urban governance, social security and welfare, and smart cities.¹⁰

For the purpose of this research, the 795 training programs were reviewed and categorized into six groups based on their reported activities as outlined in the files. The following group labels were created by the author.

1. Clearly authoritarian: The first group describes training programs which include explicit lessons on PRC practices that are widely regarded in liberal democracies as direct infringements on personal freedom. This includes PRC endorsement of non-democratic regime practices in political, government, and legal affairs, including administrative control over the media, information, and population.

2. Potentially authoritarian: These training programs contain lessons on PRC practices which have, in some cases, infringed on personal freedom or indirectly aided infringement of personal freedoms and individual rights. This includes, for example, training on dual-purpose technologies that could be exploited to access individuals’ data in ways that expand state surveillance and control over citizens’ personal lives.

3. Infrastructure and resource access: These training programs are centered on setting standards and imparting industrial technical skills for various aspects of infrastructure and resource extraction, which may further PRC access to critical resources. This includes, for example, renewable energy application, mechanization of the agricultural sector, and technologies in mining, copper processing, and biotechnology.

4. Information operation access: These training programs are centered on activities that might further PRC access for its information operations, such as programs on Chinese culture and Mandarin-language promotion for foreign officials.

5. Security access: The fifth group involves and describes training programs centered on activities that may further PRC access to the sensitive security infrastructure of a foreign country, such as programs on aviation emergency, satellite imagery, and geochemical mapping.

6. Others: The sixth group includes all other training programs that do not fit into the above categories, such as pest control, climate change, soybean production, tourism development, and preschool-education sector capacity building.

Among the 795 training courses offered by MOFCOM between 2021 and 2022, about 25 percent of the programs were categorized as clearly authoritarian, 10 percent as potentially authoritarian, 22 percent as related to infrastructure and resource access, five percent as related to security access, two percent as information-operation access, and 35 percent as “others.”

Based on this categorization, the research then focused on examining files of training programs that were not categorized as clearly authoritarian or potentially authoritarian. This revealed the extent to which Beijing used potentially authoritarian means to influence governance choices by injecting narratives that marry authoritarianism with various successes related to the economy. It further demonstrates that PRC training programs that appear to be focused on trade, infrastructure, and other nominally non-political topics are also efforts to promote China’s governance model.

The following are just two examples out of the hundreds of files in which the same pattern can be observed. In one file entitled “Seminar on international application of BeiDou and remote sensing,” and in another, “Seminar on port management for Central and Eastern European countries,” the training content specifies ten and fifteen sub-categories, respectively. At least two or three sub-categories are completely unrelated to the training subject, instead focusing on China’s reform and opening-up process, poverty-alleviation programs, and management of the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting the success of China’s particular governance model in handling these challenges. The training programs consistently and repeatedly remind trainees across the Global South that all of China’s achievements are attributed to its political choices and authoritarian governance practices.

Despite the lack of access to the exact lecture materials used in these programs, a review of the list of instructors yields insights into the kind of narratives the lecturers delivered to foreign governments. For example, Dr. Ding Yifan (丁一凡) was one of six instructors for the 13-day training on port management. A researcher at the state-backed Development Research Center of the State Council, Ding has written in support of internationalizing China’s currency to bypass “Western control” over financial mechanisms and setting up overseas Chinese economic zones to relocate parts of Chinese production to developing countries before commodities are finalized for export to Europe and North America, ensuring China’s stake in the global supply chain and embedding Chinese assets abroad.¹¹ These are positions commonly held by many Chinese academics and experts.

Ding, however, also has a more distinctive track record as an advocate for China’s authoritarian system. For example, in a lengthy 2017 online lecture titled “Advantages of the Chinese system of governance” (“中国的制度优势”)¹², Ding explicitly explained that the Chinese economic miracle is a result of “a good democratic system of socialist governance with Chinese characteristics, our democracy is the real democracy” (“是因为中国特色社会主义民主制度好，我们的民主是真正的民主”) and that “sometimes people don’t know how their own society should develop, and they need to be guided by strong leaders to show the way.”( “有时候民众并不知道他们希望社会朝哪个方向发展，需要强有力的领导人去指明方向.”) Ding’s online lecture details flaws in voting-based democratic systems, pointing to the constant change of governments and party politics as inefficient and a waste of resources. Ding makes the case that one-party authoritarian politics is the only feasible system for China: “We are a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural country. If we have multi-party politics, then our country will break apart and fall into civil war, destroying all we have built.” (中国是一个多民族、多文化国家，如果实行多党政治，那么，一定会四分五裂，陷入严重的内战，毁掉我们建国以来所做的一切努力.) Ding has also fueled disinformation against Japan and the United States, claiming Japan dared “to release nuclear-contaminated water because it has the backing of the United States” (日本胆敢排核污水底气在于背后老板是美国人) when Tokyo released wastewater from the Fukushima nuclear plant that was hit by a tsunami in 2011 after receiving approval to do so from the International Atomic Energy Agency.“¹³

Global implications and recommendations

The findings catalogued in this report underscore that the PRC is engaged in a concerted effort to promote authoritarian governance across the developing world, using its own economic success as the primary argument for why countries need not adopt “Western” democratic practices to achieve their development goals. This is occurring across Chinese training programs in Global South countries, regardless of the often-unrelated subjects purportedly addressed. While Beijing often suggests that countries should pursue approaches specific to their own local contexts, rather than adopting the Chinese model completely, PRC trainings clearly highlight aspects of its authoritarian model as central to the blueprint of successful development that others can emulate.

China is likely to continue expanding training efforts to promote autocratic governance. Numerous training programs currently conducted in China for foreign government officials are already being moved to countries across the Global South, with new Chinese institutions set up to deliver programs that are both longer term and more sophisticated. In 2022, a Chinese political leadership school was opened in Tanzania, delivering the same type of governance training program outlined above that marries authoritarianism with economic success.¹⁴ If successful, this kind of setup is likely to be recreated elsewhere. For example, Luban Workshops were introduced in 2016 as a vocational equivalent of the Confucius Institutes and there are now 27 workshops worldwide, an increase from 18 in 2021.¹⁵ Where Confucius Institutes are state-sponsored centers teaching Chinese language and culture, Luban Workshops are state-sponsored classrooms teaching Chinese industrial skills and standards. Given the findings in this report, it is reasonable to assume these workshops will weave lessons on the benefits of China’s authoritarian model into vocational classes.

Beijing’s growing drive to promote its model appears unaffected by the marked slowdown in China’s economic growth and the well documented structural challenges facing China’s economy, many of which are a result of an authoritarian system under the CCP that increasingly prioritizes political control and absolute security over unleashing the power of market innovation and consumer demand.¹⁶ In other words, the very example at the heart of China’s promotion of authoritarian governance—its own remarkable development since the late 1970s into the world’s second largest economy—may be falling apart.

Many developing countries, however, are not attuned to the mounting challenges China is facing and still value the lessons of the country’s success under authoritarian rule, presenting ample opportunities for the PRC to expand and deepen its training programs across the Global South. The potential implications of these continued efforts are significant and wide ranging.

First, more countries may entertain and potentially adopt authoritarian governance practices shared by Beijing as they seek the potential benefits of economic engagement with China. More research is needed to determine the ultimate impact of China’s governance trainings abroad on recipient countries’ political practices. However, foreign leaders already routinely accept and endorse Beijing’s perspective on Chinese domestic issues and international positions in the hopes of maintaining or increasing Chinese investment and contributions to their nation’s domestic development.¹⁷ As China’s combined economic and political influence mounts, more countries dependent on China will likely welcome its lessons and may even sacrifice their own immediate interests in return for the long-term promises that Beijing offers. In some cases, China’s success in “elite capture”—the extensive corruption of a country’s key political and business leaders, resulting in their serving China’s interests above those of their own citizens—will likely contribute to local officials’ willingness to welcome Chinese trainings. The elite capture dynamic may also increase the likelihood that lessons learned in these trainings will be incorporated into their country’s governance practices.

Second, China’s clear propaganda effort through these trainings will combine with the CCP’s broader effort to shape narratives in countries around the world regarding China’s successes and the benefits of engagement with the PRC to advance Beijing’s preferred messaging. Beijing is engaged in a global propaganda effort to “tell China’s story well,”¹⁸ as Xi has put it, and counter decades of perceived dominance of the global information space by the United States and other developed democracies, including regarding the legitimacy of non-democratic governance systems such as its own. Included in this endeavor are efforts to train and cultivate local journalists to write positive stories about China, insert official Chinese propaganda in local media outlets, deliver tailored disinformation regarding the United States and the failings of democratic governance¹⁹, and deploy United Front groups²⁰ to co-opt local elites.²¹ Across these efforts, Beijing’s messaging consistently underscores its development successes while ignoring inconvenient statistics about China’s more recent economic downturn, reinforcing the notion that countries in the Global South might benefit from following China’s developmental path.

Third, China’s expanding promotion of authoritarian practices may foster greater ideological and political polarization globally as democracy’s presumed status as the ideal form of government is thrown into greater doubt. Even if most countries exposed to CCP trainings do not adopt a wholesale authoritarian approach to governance, the selective adoption of aspects of China’s system will mean that more countries choose not to align with the United States and other democracies on a range of policy choices that will shape global governance and connectivity. For example, a number of countries have been inspired to adopt aspects of China’s top-down regulatory policies on the internet.²² This dynamic is complicating efforts to maintain a more united approach to internet management, potentially fragmenting the internet into competing technospheres. More fundamentally, potential PRC success in encouraging more sympathetic views of autocratic methods—and critical views of democracy—across the Global South would gradually undermine the ability of the United States and other democracies to credibly speak of a common future and interests among countries bonded by democratic values and aspirations.

The first step in addressing these dynamics is to recognize the extent of the problem, conducting further studies such as this one on the nature of various PRC efforts to promote its model and then, most critically, determining the actual impact of these efforts in increasing developing countries’ acceptance, adaptation, and implementation of authoritarian governance practices.

Local interests, political context, and feasibility of adaptation are all reasonable major factors that determine whether a government will ultimately import authoritarian practices and narratives. Only once the effectiveness of various PRC activities has been determined should significant effort be directed at developing tailored measures to counter them, thereby avoiding unnecessary expenditure of very limited resources on addressing the large and expanding number of CCP efforts across countries.

Even as such studies are undertaken, the United States and other democracies should increase efforts to address the relative paucity of knowledge and objective information about China and its approach to governance at home in the majority of developing countries. This lack of reliable, home-grown information on China is perhaps the PRC’s greatest asset in its efforts to promote its authoritarian model because it allows Beijing to set the dominant narrative in many countries regarding China’s rapid economic development and the role of its governance system in that achievement.

As noted, in PRC training programs, foreign government officials are fed disproportionally positive economic stories about China in an environment where Beijing is able to censor as it pleases, creating an illusion of near perfect implementation. This bolsters the strong impressions still held by many across the Global South about the Chinese economic miracle from decades ago and the discourse around authoritarian performance legitimacy.²³ It is essential that more developing countries have access to objective information on current realities in China, including the country’s economic downturn, particularly given concurrent PRC efforts to shape media ecosystems and narratives on China and leverage coopted elites.²⁴

Relatedly, it is necessary to assist countries across the Global South in cultivating and promoting authoritative expertise on China, to ensure that local voices are offering objective analysis of China’s domestic affairs, governance practices, and engagement abroad. This local expertise is also critical for broadening public and elite understanding of PRC policies and affairs that is not accessible through simply translating Chinese government documents that may be unintelligible to the uninformed. For decades, the Chinese government has tried to influence the development of authoritative foreign voices on PRC affairs, relying on PRC-educated China experts as elite proxies to distribute its narratives, set agendas, and influence foreign policymakers and the public alike. In the Global South, Beijing often controls who can study and develop an authoritative voice on PRC affairs by monopolizing the means to visit and research China, study Chinese language, and access research materials through PRC institutions.

One crucial step toward addressing this problem in the medium to long term is fostering more opportunities for independent research on PRC issues, providing alternatives to PRC-sponsored education. Countries with vast non-PRC-sponsored expertise on China should expand their global outreach, including programs for students from countries across the Global South who may wish to undertake professional Chinese studies outside of the PRC. Such independent expertise is essential to fostering objective discussions on China and competing perspectives that allow the public and their leaders to make informed judgments about the kind of Chinese success they want to replicate.

Lastly, at the basic level, countries across the Global South must be encouraged to create a debriefing process for all returning officials who take part in a PRC training program to determine and catalog the level of effort to shape perceptions and decision-making in different policy areas, including regarding authoritarian governance practices, as well as the extent to which related reporting serves China’s intelligence collection efforts.

China’s promotion of authoritarian governance and undermining of support for democratic practices and principles is likely to increase across the Global South, with Beijing further scaling up the type of trainings documented in this report. This effort is integral to the PRC’s drive to transform a global order currently predicated on the centrality of democracy and individual rights to one more “values-agnostic” and thus suited to China’s rise under authoritarian CCP rule. To counter this effort, countries across the Global South should be encouraged to make independent, informed decisions about their own development path, with access to objective information about China’s political system, domestic affairs, and economic trajectory. Despite democracy’s evident flaws, it remains the system of governance overwhelmingly preferred by publics around the world.²⁵ Beijing’s revisionist efforts to popularize autocracy will fail if citizens in the Global South have the freedom and information to determine the sort of government under which they want to live.

About the author

Fellow

Niva Yau

Nonresident Fellow

Global China Hub

Africa Central Asia

Acknowledgement

The author thanks Rana Siu Inboden and other participants at a May 2024 workshop Understanding China’s Authoritarian Projection: Training and Normative Propaganda with Other States, organized by the Robert Strauss Center for International Security and Law at the University of Texas at Austin, for feedback and review of an earlier draft.

Dataset of Chinese government files

These are 14 training program description files from the full dataset of 795, with personal identifying information removed, but remaining available upon requests for research purposes. The English-language text following the Chinese text is entirely written by the program description planner, not the author, and may consist of broken translation. We are currently planning to release all 795 of the remaining training program descriptions and the other administrative files related to their logistics.

• Marine geologic survey and coastal protection training class
• Seminar on blockchain and information security technology for developing countries
• Seminar on enhancing university governance for developing countries (online)
• Seminar on ethnic policies and practices for Belt and Road countries
• Seminar on international application of Beidou and remote sensing
• Seminar on inviting heads of foreign volunteer organizations to China
• Seminar on planning capability of safe city for African countries
• Seminar on population and development program for developing countries
• Seminar on port management for Central and Eastern European countries
• Seminar on national governance for presidential advisers of developing countries
• Seminar on new-developing urban governance for developing countries
• Seminar on new media for Belt and Road countries
• Seminar on social security and social welfare for developing countries
• Seminar for think tank scholars of the Belt and Road countries

The Global China Hub researches and devises allied solutions to the global challenges posed by China’s rise, leveraging and amplifying the Atlantic Council’s work on China across its fifteen other programs and centers.

Learn more

The post A Global South with Chinese characteristics appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On June 4, 2024, Deputy Director of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center María Fernanda Bozmoski was interviewed on Bloomberg’s Balance of Power radio show and podcast about President Joe Biden’s executive order slashing asylum claims in the US.

More about our expert

Staff

María Fernanda Bozmoski

Deputy Director, Operations and Finance

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Northern Triangle

The post Bozmoski interviewed on Bloomberg Balance of Power appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Brazil offers a useful case study of China’s strategy—and whether it’s sustainable.

Sign up for PowerPlay, the Atlantic Council’s bimonthly newsletter keeping you up to date on all facets of the energy transition.

Over the course of 2023, the value of Chinese BEV exports to Brazil surged eighteen-fold as automakers like BYD expanded their presence in the country. Chinese BEVs accounted for 92 percent of Brazil’s total BEV imports in this period.

This trend has continued durably thus far. As of April 2024, Brazil has surpassed Belgium as the top export market for China’s EVs.

Those aren’t the only numbers pointing to Brazil’s growing prominence as a market for Chinese BEVs, which constitute 88 percent of China’s total exports of electric vehicles, a category which includes both battery and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs).

In fact, Brazil imported $735 million worth of Chinese BEVs in 2023, nearly three times the value of Mexico’s imports of these Chinese vehicles. Despite increasing attention on Mexico as a destination for exports of Chinese BEVs, 2023 marked the second straight year that Brazil has ranked as Latin America’s largest importer of Chinese BEVs.

Furthermore, growth in Chinese exports of BEVs to Brazil far exceeded the overall rate of increase in exports across China’s “new three” industries—electric vehicles, lithium-ion batteries, and solar photovoltaic cells—that are critical pillars of China’s export-driven manufacturing plans. In 2023, China’s worldwide exports of these three industries increased by 30 percent—a significant jump amid sluggish global GDP growth overall, suggesting limited ability for markets to absorb this export growth.  

Whether Brazil can continue to absorb China’s overproduction of BEVs, similarly, is increasingly in doubt.

Strong domestic sales, slacking foreign competition

In recent years, EV sales in China have been robust, with BEVs—which are almost entirely produced domestically—accounting for 25 percent of total car sales in 2023. It is worth noting that this includes foreign firms, however, such as Tesla and Volkswagen.

China’s manufacturing of BEVs has outpaced domestic demand. While this might have resulted in millions of cars sitting unsold in Chinese lots, the overproduction has coincided with Western automakers such as General Motors, Ford, and Volkswagen tempering their EV ambitions amid weakening demand growth in their core markets.

This confluence of trends created an opportunity for Chinese BEV makers to boost sales abroad, as demonstrated by the 70 percent jump in BEV exports during 2023. Chinese BEV firms, and BYD in particular,  are making a concerted effort to expand outside of mainland China, offering products that outcompete peers on price, and sometimes compete strongly with internal combustion engine vehicles.

China’s growth ambitions cause concern

Rather than incentivize consumption, China is doubling down on its investment-driven growth model with an upcoming manufacturing stimulus program. Investment, expressed in World Bank data as gross capital formation, already represents 40 percent of China’s GDP, far above the global average of 25 percent and exceeding the emerging market average of 30 to 34 percent, illustrating China’s reliance on sectors like manufacturing to fuel growth.

China’s decision to expand its export-driven manufacturing sector is causing handwringing in target markets. The Brazilian government has opened a number of probes into China’s alleged “dumping” of goods. The European Union has also opened investigations into potential “non-market practices and policies” adopted by China.

China’s exports of its record surplus of manufactured goods beyond current levels will depend on other countries’ willingness to let China take market share from domestic industry. In an increasingly protectionist era, that seems far-fetched.

Will Brazil absorb China’s manufacturing surplus?

The surge in imports of BEVs from China has been rapid, offering little time to react. However, for Brazil, the stakes for its industrial competitiveness are high, and its tolerance for China’s encroachment on its automotive industry may be limited.

For one, automobiles are a critical cog in Brazilian industry. As of 2020, 89 percent of vehicles sold in the country were domestically produced, although this may have decreased slightly amid a surge of Chinese BEV imports. The car sector accounts for about 20 percent of industrial GDP, an area of critical importance to Brazil, where value-added manufacturing’s share of GDP has declined from 26 percent in 1993 to 11 percent in 2022.

Second, Brazil does not want to deepen its reliance on imports of high-tech and value-added products. In 2021, Brazil’s imports of capital, consumer, and intermediate goods accounted for 93 percent of total goods imports, a symptom of the country’s increasing trade specialization in the export of raw materials, which represented 55.7 percent of Brazil’s exports of goods. The government has expressed its discontent with this status quo, seeking to avoid trade arrangements that “condemn our county to be an eternal exporter of raw materials,” in the words of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

Furthermore, Brazil has made supporting the domestic auto sector a priority. In May 2023, the Lula administration unveiled a series of measures to promote domestic auto manufacturing via credit lines, tax breaks, and incentives for the use of domestic content.

A continued rise in cheap Chinese EV imports would not align with Lula’s top-down push for re-industrialization, designed to foster formal high-wage employment, innovation, and economic diversification. In fact, his administration has announced new tariffs on electric vehicles, which will ramp up to a 35 percent import tax by 2026.

As such, China will likely need to find more willing buyers of its surplus EVs. Although it is difficult to forecast where the next surge in imports will take place, South and Southeast Asian markets such as India, Indonesia, and Thailand could begin to exhibit stronger uptake, as could markets in Latin America such as Colombia and Mexico.

William Tobin is an assistant director at the Atlantic Council Global Energy Center.

EnergySource

EnergySource is the Global Energy Center’s (GEC) online publication providing commentary and analysis on developments in the energy and climate sector from a wide-array of thought leaders, politicians, and experts.

Read more

Staff

William Tobin

Assistant Director

Global Energy Center

Africa China

EnergySource Feb 24, 2023

Lula is back. Are Brazil’s climate credentials?

By Lizi Bowen, Maia Sparkman, William Tobin

Lula’s return to office in Brazil heralded a renewed commitment to environmental stewardship. But steps must be taken to ensure that renewal becomes as concrete and effective as possible.

Brazil Climate Change & Climate Action

EnergySource May 23, 2024

Without tariffs, the EU faces a flood of Chinese imports of the ‘new three’

By Joseph Webster

Europe faces a surge in Chinese cleantech imports following recent US tariffs. This should prompt Brussels to selectively impose its own tariffs while also strengthening domestic industries to protect its economic and strategic interests.

Central Europe China

EnergySource May 13, 2024

What US tariffs on Chinese batteries mean for decarbonization—and Taiwan

By Joseph Webster

In response to Beijing’s attempts to cement its dominant position across the “new three” technologies of solar photovoltaics (PVs), electric vehicles (EVs), and batteries, the Biden administration is poised to issue tariffs on key Chinese products. A look at China’s battery exports, and its associated battery complex, reveals both opportunities and risks for US and allied […]

China Energy Transitions

The Global Energy Center develops and promotes pragmatic and nonpartisan policy solutions designed to advance global energy security, enhance economic opportunity, and accelerate pathways to net-zero emissions.

learn more

The post Brazil is buying lots of Chinese EVs. Will that continue? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On June 4, 2024, Deputy Director of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center María Fernanda Bozmoski was interviewed on Bloomberg Markets about expectations around the Claudia Sheinbaum presidency in Mexico.

The segment starts approximately 34 minutes into the video.

More about our expert

Staff

María Fernanda Bozmoski

Deputy Director, Operations and Finance

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Northern Triangle

The post Bozmoski interviewed on Bloomberg Markets appeared first on Atlantic Council.

A former mayor of Mexico City, Sheinbaum has a strong foundation in addressing urban challenges, governance, and social policies. Like her predecessor, outgoing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Sheinbaum will likely coordinate her policies under a narrative of addressing social injustice and advocating for Mexico’s most vulnerable. But unlike her predecessor, Sheinbaum is an environmental engineer and climate scientist by training. She appears poised to place environmental issues, including climate-change mitigation and adaptation, high among her social justice concerns. This would likely include seeking to advance issues ranging from sustainable agriculture to renewable energy.

At first glance, this may sound odd. Mexico is a major oil producer—the second largest exporter in Latin America after Brazil—and Sheinbaum has all but guaranteed that she will continue funding the state-owned oil company PEMEX, which suffers from a range of inefficiencies and carries debt of more than one hundred billion dollars. However, her scientific background and previous initiatives indicate a potential for balancing economic development with environmental sustainability. For example, during her time as mayor of Mexico City, Sheinbaum spearheaded the installment of solar power panels on top of a major market. Furthermore, she campaigned for president on a promise to address, early on in her administration, the water issues affecting Mexico City. Already during her first speech since the election, and probably in an effort to differentiate herself from López Obrador, Sheinbaum spoke about an upcoming renewable energy program for Mexico. Calibrating this balance will be crucial, as will working with regional partners. After all, Mexico and its neighbor Guatemala, for instance, face similar challenges of environmental degradation and the impacts of climate change, from flooding to droughts and a lack of access to water.

Another way in which Sheinbaum could partner with her Central American neighbors is by working together to seize nearshoring opportunities. Specifically, she and her regional counterparts could promote a mechanism whereby Central American economies would be able to join the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Nearshoring, or bringing international supply chains and production closer to the US market, can provide significant economic benefits, creating jobs and fostering economic stability in Mexico and throughout Central America. Promoting economic integration through the USMCA could provide a structured framework for this cooperation. The idea has been floated for a couple of years now, first by Costa Rica in 2022. This move would enhance the competitive edge of Central American economies, which in many ways are too small to make a difference on their own but together could create economies of scale. Bringing other Central American countries into the USMCA would allow these nations to benefit from the same trade advantages enjoyed by Mexico. It could also reduce many of the economic pressures that drive migration, namely a lack of jobs and insufficient wages.

Furthermore, Sheinbaum’s administration could adopt a more humanitarian approach to migration, focusing on protecting migrant rights and providing humanitarian assistance. While López Obrador touted his tree-planting “Sembrando Vida” program, Sheinbaum could take the programs a step further. This approach aligns with her broader progressive values—she is a self-described humanist—and can enhance Mexico’s role as a regional leader in addressing the migration crisis. During the campaign, Sheinbaum repeatedly mentioned increased investments in social and youth programs in Central America, which, if designed holistically and sustainably, could effectively curb migration from Mexico’s neighbors. This is particularly important now, as US President Joe Biden prepares to roll out an executive order that would allow the United States to temporarily close its southern border if a threshold of encounters with migrants at the border is reached—reportedly, an average of five thousand crossings in a week or 2,500 in a day.

Regional security is another area in which Sheinbaum could make a big difference. Almost three dozen candidates were assassinated during the current electoral campaign, and record-breaking violence in the country is resulting in more than thirty thousand homicides each year. Improved and increased intelligence-sharing between Mexico and Central American countries can help combat organized crime and violence, which are significant push factors for migration. This is also an area in which the United States and Mexico may look to double down on their cooperation. Sheinbaum has pledged to address the rampant impunity in Mexico—less than five percent of criminal investigations are solved and many crimes go unreported. While Sheinbaum is unlikely to approach the security issue in the severe manner of President Nayib Bukele in El Salvador, she has recognized the urgency of this issue for the livelihood of millions of Mexicans.

Sheinbaum’s presidency could bring about significant positive change in Mexico and its relations with Central America. Her administration’s policies on energy and environmental sustainability, economic integration, and migration will have an important impact on the future of the region. The first female president of Mexico has the opportunity to redefine her country’s role in Central America, address the root causes of migration, and promote a more stable and prosperous region. In this new chapter for Mexico and the region, the Aztec nation could very well be a strong and stable partner for Central American nations.

María Fernanda Bozmoski is deputy director, operations and finance at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, where she leads the center’s work on Mexico and Central America.

The post Three ways Mexico’s new president could transform Central America appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On June 4, 2024, Vice President and Senior Director of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center Jason Marczak was interviewed on El Heraldo Radio about the priorities for Claudia Sheinbaum’s administration.

More about our expert

Staff

Jason Marczak

Vice President and Senior Director

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Americas Caribbean

The post Marczak interviewed on El Heraldo Radio about Mexican election results appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On June 3, 2024, Deputy Director of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center María Fernanda Bozmoski was interviewed by Caitriona Perry on BBC News about Mexico’s new president-elect, Claudia Sheinbaum.

More about our expert

Staff

María Fernanda Bozmoski

Deputy Director, Operations and Finance

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Northern Triangle

The post Bozmoski interviewed on BBC News about Mexico election results appeared first on Atlantic Council.

The numbers show an incoming administration with a strong mandate. With 58.3 to 60.7 percent of the vote, according to the National Electoral Institute’s Quick Count, Sheinbaum will enter office on October 1 even surpassing the share obtained by the current president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who won in 2018 with 53.2 percent of the votes. Her margin of victory over the second-place finisher could range from 29.7 to 34.1 percentage points—on track to likely surpass López Obrador’s margin (30.9 percentage points) as well. 

Beyond the surprise in outperforming even some of the most generous polls, her party, MORENA, and its allies received a mandate in Congress that also surpassed expectations. In the Chamber of Deputies, the new Congress will convene in September with the MORENA coalition holding a supermajority (at least two-thirds of the seats), and it is within striking range to do the same in the Senate. Early signs indicate that the MORENA coalition will hold a minimum of 346 seats in the 500-person lower House and could hold anywhere from 76 to 88 seats in the 128-person Senate, with 85 seats required for a supermajority.

The significance here cannot be overstated. A supermajority allows for constitutional changes—from the direct election of judges to the independence of regulatory agencies—which could not be obtained thus far by the López Obrador administration. Explicit campaign pledges can now be advanced. This means a potential acceleration of the Fourth Transformation of the Mexican state as ushered in by López Obrador, especially if the outgoing president prioritizes constitutional changes once the new Congress convenes on September 1.

As López Obrador’s hand-picked successor, Sheinbaum will certainly continue with her predecessor’s policies, but she will also be her own president. A scientist by training and a former secretary of the environment, she will bring new technical expertise and pragmatism to the presidency. That was evident in her time as head of government of Mexico City, where she developed and then continuously followed up on the implementation status of her 220-page government plan.

Expect to see several of her priorities during her term running Mexico City to carry over to her presidential administration. For example, speaking with the Atlantic Council on the sidelines of the Cities Summit of the Americas last year, Sheinbaum showed an in-depth, technical perspective on sustainability—not simply as stewardship of natural resources, but also as an issue interconnected with education, social justice, healthcare, housing, and infrastructure. 

Sheinbaum mentioned throughout her campaign the need to move forward with the energy transition, comments that reflect her background in energy engineering. There will inevitably be a role for the private sector to play in this transition, but as with her broader perspectives, the view of the Sheinbaum camp is that the government should lead the charge. The public-private partnerships that Sheinbaum moved forward during her leadership in Mexico City could be a model she brings to her new administration to advance, for example, more renewable energy projects in Mexico.

Infrastructure will also likely be a priority for the incoming administration. In her acceptance speech early Monday morning, Sheinbaum spoke about the need for new highways, trains, airports, and ports. All of these strategic projects are critical for Mexico to take advantage of the investment opportunities related to nearshoring with the United States. But given the tight government budget conditions that the new government will face, completing these projects will not be easy. Here, too, watch to see if the new administration turns to public-private partnerships to move these projects forward.

Finally, Sheinbaum will assume office in October with not only a sizable domestic mandate, but also with an opportunity to deepen Mexico’s engagement beyond its borders. López Obrador rarely traveled abroad, and Sheinbaum followed suit as head of government in Mexico City. Even though she took office in 2018, her trip to Denver for the Cities Summit of the Americas last year was rarity. But if and when she goes abroad, she will generate much interest given the potentially transformative moment she will oversee in Mexico and her place in history as Mexico’s first female president.

Jason Marczak is vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center. He leads work on the economic and security impacts of greater efficiencies and reduced wait times at the US-Mexico border including presenting findings before the Mexican Congress.

Bosco Martí is a nonresident senior fellow with the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center and is the global director of institutional affairs and communications for Aleatica. He previously served as executive director for Mexico and the Dominican Republic at the Inter-American Development Bank.

The post Sheinbaum just won a massive mandate in Mexico. Here’s how she might use it. appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On June 3, 2024, Vice President and Senior Director of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center Jason Marczak was interviewed on DW News about the mandate for Mexico’s next president, Claudia Sheinbaum.

More about our expert

Staff

Jason Marczak

Vice President and Senior Director

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Americas Caribbean

The post Marczak interviewed by DW News about Sheinbaum’s mandate appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On June 3, 2024, Vice President and Senior Director of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center Jason Marczak was interviewed on CNN’s Isa Soares Tonight about the mandate for Mexico President-elect Claudia Sheinbaum.

More about our expert

Staff

Jason Marczak

Vice President and Senior Director

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Americas Caribbean

The post Marczak interviewed on CNN’s Isa Soares Tonight about Mexican president-elect appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On June 3, 2024, Vice President and Senior Director of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center Jason Marczak was quoted by Reuters about Mexico President-elect Claudia Sheinbaum.

More about our expert

Staff

Jason Marczak

Vice President and Senior Director

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Americas Caribbean

The post Marczak quoted by Reuters about Mexico’s president-elect appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On June 2, 2024, Vice President and Senior Director of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center Jason Marczak was interviewed by Helena Humphreys of BBC News about the elections in Mexico.

More about our expert

Staff

Jason Marczak

Vice President and Senior Director

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Americas Caribbean

The post Marczak interviewed on BBC News about Mexico’s presidential election appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On June 1, 2024, Vice President and Senior Director of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center Jason Marczak was interviewed on CNN Newsroom about the June 2 elections in Mexico.

More about our expert

Staff

Jason Marczak

Vice President and Senior Director

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Americas Caribbean

The post Marczak interviewed by CNN about 2024 Mexico election appeared first on Atlantic Council.

This is a report from the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center in partnership with the US Department of State. This readout was informed by multi-stakeholder dialogues focused on facilitating greater, constructive exchange among multi-sectoral thought leaders and government leaders as they work to implement commitments made at the Ninth Summit of the Americas.

Executive summary

On March 14, the Atlantic Council’s Caribbean Initiative partnered with the US Department of State to organize the PACC 2030 Road to Implementation Summit on the sidelines of the Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas Ministerial Meetings in the Dominican Republic. The summit built on the PACC 2030 Climate Resilient Clean Energy Summit, which took place on the sidelines of US Vice President Kamala Harris’s inaugural trip to the Caribbean in June 2023, and previous partnerships with the Department of State to advance commitments adopted at the Ninth Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles in 2022. Since then, the Atlantic Council has organized a PACC 2030 Working Group and has worked closely with governments, the business community, and civil society organizations to support the implementation of PACC 2030’s objectives.

5 recommendations for implementing PACC 2030’s commitments:

Report

Apr 16, 2024

Advancing health and resilience policies in Latin America and the Caribbean

By Isabel Chiriboga, Martin Cassinelli, Diego Area

During an off-the-record private roundtable, thought leaders and practitioners from across the Americas discussed how to further enhance access to and finance for health services and products in the region.

Coronavirus Latin America

Summit of the Americas

Amid global uncertainties and new challenges, the ninth Summit of the Americas is a renewed opportunity to bring about hemispheric cooperation and consensus to reach regional prosperity and security.

Online Event Fri, May 31, 2024 • 1:30 pm ET

Hurricane readiness: Building climate resilience in the Caribbean

The conversation is part of the Caribbean Initiative’s continued focus on how climate change impacts the region.

Americas Caribbean Civil Society Climate Change & Climate Action

Online Event Thu, January 27, 2022 • 2:00 pm ET

Road to the Summit. Responding to the next disaster: Building health and climate resilience in the Americas

A conversation to generate strategies for creating stronger hemispheric collaboration ahead of the ninth Summit of the Americas.

Americas Caribbean Climate Change & Climate Action Latin America

Online Event Fri, June 10, 2022 • 10:00 pm ET

The joint future of the Caribbean working with Latin America

A series of discussions featuring heads of state and government following the conclusion of the Summit of the Americas.

Staff

Wazim Mowla

Associate Director & Fellow, Caribbean Initiative

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Caribbean China

Staff

Charlene Aguilera

Program Assistant

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Caribbean French

The Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center broadens understanding of regional transformations and delivers constructive, results-oriented solutions to inform how the public and private sectors can advance hemispheric prosperity.

Learn more

The post PACC 2030 objectives: The road to implementation appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Following the official three-month presidential campaign, polling indicates that one candidate has a firm lead. Assuming former Mexico City Head of Government Claudia Sheinbaum performs on par with expectations—the latest Reforma poll gives her a 20 percentage point lead over former Senator Xóchitl Gálvez—the candidate of the governing MORENA party will become Mexico’s first female president on October 1. The lack of movement in this poll since the campaign season began on March 1 is noteworthy. Sheinbaum has only dropped 3 percentage points (to 55 percent support) in the last three months. Other polls give Sheinbaum a lead of anywhere from 11 to 22 percentage points, with voter turnout one of the major factors to watch on Sunday.

More uncertain is what will happen in Mexico’s Congress. What has scuttled attempts by the current Mexican president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, to fully carry out some elements of his government’s plan has been the checks provided by Congress. With a simple majority of seats—rather than the supermajority of two-thirds of the seats—the MORENA coalition rallied to pass some important pieces of legislation, but it has been impeded from making major constitutional changes, including controversial proposals for the popular election of Supreme Court judges and eliminating independent regulators.

Thus, this Sunday’s vote will determine whether López Obrador’s hand-picked successor, Sheinbaum, could advance the outgoing president’s stymied constitutional proposals. Polls—although less numerous and harder to calculate given the sheer number of candidates up for election (628 combined senators and deputies)—indicate continuity in Congress. Polls by the newspaper El Financiero, for example, predict that the MORENA coalition will secure 49 percent of the seats in the Chamber of Deputies with opposition parties taking 40 percent. The check on power provided by Congress in this scenario, in which MORENA would lack a supermajority, would likely give assurance to international markets, since uncertainty around such reforms and their repercussions can generate anxiety for investors.

Counting the ways to count

How does Mexico’s unique vote-counting work? While the final congressional breakdown will take some time to determine, expect declarations on the presidential winner on Sunday night. Hours after polls close, results will begin to be shared from two different systems that count votes: the quick count and the preliminary electoral results program (PREP).

The quick count takes a predetermined, statistically representative sample of polling stations, and then it gives a minimum and maximum possible vote percentage for each candidate. Results are expected to be announced around 11:00 p.m. (CST), with all eyes on whether the margin of possible votes indicates a clear winner. The PREP, which is operational beginning at 8:00 p.m. (CST), reports results in real time from all polling stations as transmitted, which means that urban votes are likely to be accounted for earlier in the process. And to make things even more complicated, the official counting does not begin until June 5, thus the importance of the earlier vote-counting methods to give more timely results.

The other election

The next Mexican president will also have a keen interest in the vote-counting on November 5. The US election, and in particular how Mexico figures into the campaign leading up to election day, will set the stage for the coming years of bilateral ties. A newly inaugurated Mexican president may be forced to immediately respond to US campaign rhetoric.

Security and migration are top issues both north and south of the Rio Grande. While Sheinbaum has pledged to continue the current government’s focus on social and educational programs to reduce violence, Gálvez favors a strategy that puts greater emphasis on the security apparatus to combat crime. On migration policy, both candidates would continue to take a human-centered approach that recognizes and seeks to find solutions to the high demand for labor. A third important bilateral issue will be the review period of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, also known as USMCA, as the 2026 sunset clause approaches. This is all the more important now that Mexico is the United States’ number one trade partner. Here, a new Atlantic Council report suggests several ways that the next Mexican administration can unlock even greater border commercial efficiencies and new trade and investment.

Amid a fast-changing global order, a prosperous Mexico and strong US-Mexico ties will be increasingly important for the United States. US and Mexican security and economic concerns are deeply intertwined, as are their people. Sunday’s vote will set a crucial marker for how the relationship develops for the rest of the 2020s.

Jason Marczak is vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

The post What to watch in Mexico’s elections: A supermajority and a superpower appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Coming up this Thursday, in Season 2, Episode 2 of the Guns for Hire podcast, host Alia Brahimi is joined by Dr. Andrés Macías, a Bogota-based expert on Colombian mercenaries. They begin by looking at the explosive case of 26 Colombians arrested for their part in the 2021 assassination of the Haitian president, as well as the public debate within Colombia. Andrés goes on to explain what makes former Colombian soldiers so interesting to the international private security market, the link back to the protracted armed conflict in Colombia and the recognized value of US training, as well as the need for the Colombian government to strengthen its veterans’ policy. They also discuss the thousands of Colombians who enlist under the banner of the United Arab Emirates and what’s driving hundreds of Colombians to sign up to fight Russia in Ukraine.

Find the Guns For Hire podcast on the app of your choice

Guns for Hire podcast is a production of the Atlantic Council’s North Africa Initiative. Taking Libya as its starting point, it explores the causes and implications of the growing use of mercenaries in armed conflict.

The podcast features guests from many walks of life, from ethicists and historians to former mercenary fighters. It seeks to understand what the normalization of contract warfare tells us about the world we currently live in, the future of the international system, and what war could look like in the coming decades.

MENASource May 24, 2024

Libya’s special envoy resigned. What’s next for the country?

By Tahani Elmogrbi

Tahani Elmogrbi interviewed the High National Election Commission chairman to get his perspective on the elections in the current environment after Abdullah Batili’s resignation.

Conflict Democratic Transitions

MENASource May 21, 2024

A Rafah invasion might kill peace between Israel and Egypt

By Shahira Amin

Egypt’s intention to pull out of hostage deal mediation efforts and the continued closure of the Rafah border crossing are alarm bells for Israel.

Conflict Israel

MENASource May 20, 2024

Parliament was dissolved in Kuwait and hardly anyone noticed

By Richard LeBaron

The conflict between the opposition-dominated parliament and the appointed cabinet is not new, and this is not the first time the parliament has been suspended.

Democratic Transitions Elections

Through our Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East and Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative, the Atlantic Council works with allies and partners in Europe and the wider Middle East to protect US interests, build peace and security, and unlock the human potential of the region.

Learn more

The post What makes Colombian mercenaries so interesting? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On Thursday, May 23, 2024, Senior Fellow Pepe Zhang of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center gave testimony before the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission in a hearing on key economic strategies for leveling the US-China playing field in trade, investment, and technology. Below is a written version of his testimony.

Summary

At the Commission’s request, this testimony evaluates US economic engagement with Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC)—taking into account competition and comparison with Chinese efforts, where applicable—and provides recommendations for improvement. Specifically:

• Section I: The testimony provides an overview of China’s rise in LAC’s economic context
• Section II: It then describes recent US economic engagement—with an emphasis on the Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity (APEP)—as well as regional reception and needs across three areas:
  • Greater US policy attention
  • More US resources
  • Enhanced policy continuity
• Section III: Based on the above, the testimony prescribes three policy tools and pathways to enhance US economic engagement with the region, related in particular to supply chains:
  • Trade policy: tariff, nontariff, and complementary measures
  • Industrial policy that induces self-sustaining and whole-of-ecosystem supply chain enhancements
  • Development policy: financial and nonfinancial development assistance and cooperation
• Section IV: In conclusion, it distills the preceding analysis into nine recommendations to the Commission and congressional and other stakeholders across three levels:
  • Policy level: Recommendations regarding trade policy, industrial policy, and development policy tools
  • Resource level: Recommendations to unlock more resources for specific US government agencies and efforts and multilateral development organizations
  • Strategic level: Strategic recommendations to ensure US policy attention, resources, and continuity towards LAC

I. The rise of China in regional economic context

The Latin American and Caribbean region (LAC) has registered on average a modest 2-2.5 percent annual growth rate over the past thirty years, among the slowest in the world. To varying degrees, most countries in the region saw considerable improvements in monetary and fiscal policymaking. But, they continue to face structural challenges such as limited productivity gains, socioeconomic inequality, and low levels of foreign investment. In the same period, the lack of significant new domestic growth drivers—coupled with waves of trade liberalization efforts around the world and several regional economies’ growing export success—prompted LAC efforts to enhance and diversify economic engagement with international partners.

Against this backdrop, China swiftly emerged as a key economic player in LAC, especially in South America, across four main areas: trade, foreign direct investment (FDI), official lending, and infrastructure development.¹

1. Trade

Trade represents the most significant area of Chinese economic engagement with LAC. The dramatic expansion in bilateral trade underscores the growing economic interdependence between these two regions. Over the past twenty-five years, trade between China and LAC has multiplied over twenty times to nearly $500 billion in 2023. China has become by far the largest trading partner for countries like Chile, Peru, and Brazil, accounting for over 30-40 percent of their total exports. By comparison, this is three to four times higher than China’s share of total US, German, or European Union (EU) exports (less than 10 percent).

Trade flows remain robust in the other direction as well. LAC consumers increasingly favor Chinese goods and services, including high value-add technology products such as cell phones and automobiles or services like TikTok. One important caveat on China-LAC trade is that sizable differences exist across LAC subregions: South America (mostly commodity exporters) is much more dependent on trade with China than Central America, Mexico, and the Caribbean (Figure 1).

Figure 1: China’s participation in LAC subregions’ trade in 2005, 2020, and 2035 (projected, in percent) ²

2. Investment

While Chinese investment cratered globally starting 2016, particularly in major markets like the EU and the United States, it has shown smaller decline and relative resilience in LAC. This is attributable to at least two regional factors: still-attractive assets and valuations and a friendlier regulatory environment for Chinese investors (compared to heightened scrutiny in advanced economies).

Brazil is the largest recipient of Chinese investment in LAC, and China is Brazil’s top investor. In 2021, Brazil received a record $5.9 billion in Chinese FDI, surpassing the $4.7 billion China invested in the United States in the same year—remarkable considering that the Brazilian economy is one tenth the size of the United States’. In terms of sectors, Chinese FDI and mergers and acquisitions in the region traditionally concentrated in energy, mineral, and utilities, but have been diversifying into new areas such as ICT and manufacturing.

3. Lending

Chinese official lending to LAC peaked between 2007 and 2016, averaging more than ten billion dollars annually. But it has since declined significantly as part of a global retrenchment in Chinese government lending overseas. As Beijing’s cautiousness continues, new activities in this space will likely involve renegotiations and restructurings of existing loans rather than new disbursements. Venezuela, which represents less than 5 percent of regional GDP, has been the top recipient (approximately 40 percent of stock) of Chinese official lending to LAC.

4. Infrastructure development

Chinese construction firms have actively participated in LAC’s infrastructure development through public tenders, winning numerous high-profile projects and at times outcompeting US and European firms. The visible, tangible nature of infrastructure projects (roads, ports, stadiums, hospitals, etc.) contributes to China’s growing economic presence in the region. As well, they help to alleviate excess capacity in China’s domestic industrial and construction sectors.

China’s economic engagement is generally seen as a growth driver and therefore well-received by regional stakeholders. For some South American nations, trade flows and business cycles have already become more aligned and synchronized with China’s than with traditional partners’ including the Group of Seven (G7) economies (Figures 2 & 3). Such strong economic linkages have potential implications for the effectiveness of US policy. For instance, the United States may find it increasingly challenging to leverage certain geoeconomic tools (e.g., US-led coordination of multilateral sanctions) against China in the region. In general, most LAC countries already avoid being caught up or publicly choosing sides in the US-China competition.

Figure 2: Major trading partners’ participation in LAC Trade from 2000 to 2035 (projected) ³

Figure 3: G7 vs. Chinese growth impact on and correlation with LAC economies ⁴

Note: Placement above the forty-five-degree line indicates a country’s growth is more responsive to China than to the G7.
SA stands for South America. MCC stands for Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean.

II. Recent US economic engagement and regional reception

1. Recent US economic engagement including APEP

Despite China’s growing economic footprint in South America, the United States remains LAC’s most important economic partner in aggregate terms. LAC trades more with the United States than it does with any other country on the back of stronger-than-ever commercial ties between the United States and Mexico. In 2023, the size of US-Mexico trade alone (approximately $800 billion) far exceeded the size of China’s trade with the entire LAC region (approximately $500 billion). The United States also maintains an expansive, outsize network of existing trade agreements in the hemisphere, boasting twelve free trade agreement (FTA) partners in it (and only eight outside). Additionally, the United States is consistently the largest foreign investor in the region, followed by Spain. The potential for investment and collaboration in strategic and emerging sectors is significant: three out of the seven countries eligible for US government support through the International Technology Security and Innovation (ITSI) fund—created under the 2022 CHIPS Act to strengthen semiconductor and telecommunications supply chains—are located in LAC.

With a handful of ideological exceptions, countries in the region largely welcome pragmatic international economic engagement including with the United States. The latest flagship US regional economic policy initiative is APEP, announced by the Biden administration in June 2022 during the Ninth Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles. APEP’s four main priorities are to foster regional competitiveness, resilience, shared prosperity, and inclusive and sustainable investment in LAC. It currently has twelve members: Barbados, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Mexico, Panama, Peru, the United States, and Uruguay.

APEP is structured around three tracks (foreign affairs, finance, and trade), with respective working groups led by individual countries. The working groups cover a wide range of topics, with the initially established ones addressing eight: entrepreneurship, digital workforce development, clean hydrogen, rule of law, sustainable health infrastructure, sustainable food production, water and basic sanitation, and space. Notable announcements so far include a USAID Entrepreneurship Accelerator with initial support from Canada and Uruguay, digital technology workforce development including the first APEP Semiconductor Workforce Symposium held in Costa Rica, and innovative development finance cooperation with the Inter-American Development Bank on climate and migration issues. ⁵

A significant component of APEP is its focus on hemispheric trade and supply chain resilience. In particular, the first APEP trade ministers’ meeting in March 2024 emphasized three key priorities: trade facilitation and digitalization of customs procedures; conducting a gap analysis of critical value and supply chains; and trade for the benefit of small and medium-sized enterprises and underserved communities. Sector-wise, APEP has initially targeted energy, semiconductors, and medical supplies as priority sectors, largely consistent with the four product categories identified by the Biden administration’s Executive Order 14017, as well as broader US interagency efforts on friendshoring/nearshoring.

2. Regional reception

APEP and other efforts of US economic engagement are generally well received in LAC. But they can be improved in three ways from a regional perspective:

a. Policy attention

A main criticism of US foreign policy towards LAC over the past two decades is that Washington has overlooked the region to accommodate priorities elsewhere. More recently, the symbolism of hosting two highest-level hemispheric political events in the United States (the 2022 Summit of the Americas and the 2023 APEP Leaders’ Summit) helped to mitigate such perception to some extent. But systematically shoring up US commitment to the region will demand a strategic rethink of what is at stake.

The US economy has much to gain, buoyed by a more prosperous and stable neighboring region. And it has even more to lose in an economically unstable Western Hemisphere, with secondary effects such as migration challenges already impacting US domestic politics.

In terms of nearshoring/friendshoring, LAC offers several valuable advantages that the United States would do well to leverage and reinforce, in an era of global supply chain reshuffling and heightened geopolitical uncertainty:

• geographic proximity;
• competitive wages;
• an overwhelming majority of democratic, peaceful, and friendly states (albeit imperfect);
• a diverse group of governments and companies interested in working with the United States, from the manufacturing powerhouse in Mexico, to dynamic small open economies with proven macroeconomic and sectoral successes such as the Dominican Republic, and South American commodity exporters that are increasingly influencing global food security, energy, and climate transition agendas. ⁶

b. Resources

Another key regional observation regarding US economic engagement concerns the need for more concrete follow-up actions and adequate resource allocation. This is often considered a byproduct of insufficient US policy attention described above. For instance, APEP experienced a perceived hiatus between being announced during the 2022 Summit of the Americas and regaining momentum around the 2023 APEP Leaders’ Summit. Since the Leaders’ Summit, however, countries have quickly ramped up technical work and senior officials’ meetings, with a view to achieve tangible progress ahead of the second APEP Leaders’ Summit, to be held in Costa Rica in 2025.

With respect to resources, members have understandably expressed interest in accessing economic opportunities, US investment, and financial support through APEP. For the time being, a substantial part of such support will likely be mobilized through innovative partnerships, including with different US government agencies, extra-regional allies, APEP members themselves, the Inter-American Development Bank especially its private sector arm IDB Invest, and potential resources from the recently introduced Americas Trade and Investment Act (Americas Act). Going forward, a clearer definition of APEP’s governance structure, membership criteria, and pathways to resources can more effectively unleash opportunities for the benefit of APEP members.

c. Policy continuity

Economic and political relations between the United States and LAC risk becoming more unpredictable amidst electoral cycles across the Americas, including the upcoming 2024 US presidential election. Potential elections-induced policy shifts, if more drastic than normal, could undermine US interests. For instance, as regional partners grapple to navigate and reconcile different US administrations’ flagship LAC policy initiatives, they do not face similar struggles with China and its Belt & Road Initiative.

In this context, the Americas Act recently introduced by Senators Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and Michael Bennet (D-CO) alongside Representatives Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL), Adriano Espaillat (D-NY), and Mike Gallagher (R-WI) brings about a remarkable opportunity to ensure long-term US policy continuity and coherence in LAC. This bipartisan and bicameral legislative effort proposes a comprehensive vision for US economic partnership with the region, underpinned by trade, investment, and supply chain integration, as well as significant new resources. Moreover, in a rare and much-needed display of legislative-executive coordination, the Americas Act built a bridge to the Biden administration’s efforts by fast-tracking APEP members’ eligibility for Americas Act resources. ⁷

III. Tools and pathways for future enhancements

To bolster economic integration between the United States and LAC with a focus on supply chain integration, it is vital to better utilize, innovate, and explain specific US policy tools to regional partners. At a high level, such tools should play to the unique strengths—and take into account the limits—of the US economy, US government, and their hemispheric ties. Where possible, they should be complemented by targeted capacity building that fosters stronger, self-sustaining local economies in LAC, as well as a more symbiotic economic relationship with the United States. Specifically, such tools may span across three interconnected areas: (a) trade policy; (b) industrial policy; and (c) development policy.

1. Trade policy

Trade policy instruments include both tariff and nontariff measures.

• Tariff: The scope for using traditional trade agreement/tariff instruments is limited, due to ongoing domestic backlash against expanding foreign access to the US market. In the absence of new FTA negotiations, the United States and hemispheric partners are focusing recent efforts on making the most out of the existing US trade toolbox and network. Some examples are legislative measures that aim to surgically insert smaller economies (such as Uruguay, Ecuador, and Costa Rica) through existing preferential trade arrangements, while creating pathways towards eventual bilateral FTAs in some cases.
• Nontariff: More can and should be done in the realm of nontariff measures, such as harmonizing hemispheric regulatory and phytosanitary standards, streamlining customs procedures, and improving connectivity infrastructure. These measures help to reduce the cost and time of intraregional trade flows, thus boosting the efficiency and competitiveness of hemispheric production and exports. Here, the United States can play a leadership role, facilitated by its existing FTAs with twelve countries in the region.

Greater interoperability—tariff and nontariff—among US trade ties with hemispheric partners is a practical way to advance the regional economic integration agenda in LAC, which has stalled in recent decades due to political polarization within and across countries. With intra-regional trade representing only 20 percent of LAC’s total trade (the lowest and slowest-growing of all world regions), nearshoring—or regionalized supply chains—in the Americas cannot meet its full potential. ⁸

• Complementary coordination measures and special considerations may include modernizing policies and regulations to better address digital trade, intellectual property, and labor standards concerns; accumulation of rules of origin for strategic sectors and products; an ambitious plan towards eventual interoperability with FTAs in the region currently not involving the United States; an inclusive focus on integrating smaller, dynamic economies (many of which are strong US allies) that may otherwise face hurdles to enter regional/global supply chains, due not only to price but scale competition vis-à-vis Asia, etc.

2. Industrial policy

Beyond conventional trade tools, enhanced industrial policy is needed to strengthen productive capabilities and integration within the Western Hemisphere. Well-designed tools (US policies, incentives, investments, and signaling) in this area should focus not on creating one-off success stories but inducing self-sustaining and whole-of-ecosystem supply chain enhancements.

• Whole-of-ecosystem: One of the main advantages of China/Asia-based manufacturing today is its complete, sophisticated supply ecosystems, where a wide range of specializations and suppliers are available along entire value chains upstream and downstream. If the ultimate US policy objective is to replicate these ecosystems in the Western Hemisphere, policymakers can extract helpful lessons from Asia’s flying-geese-paradigm industrialization. In this paradigm, Japan as a “leading goose” invested in, shared knowledge about, and induced industrial upgrading in the rest of Asia. By doing so, it made Japanese/Asian exports more cost-competitive, while creating positive spillover effects that led to self-sustaining regional supply chains and additional comparative advantages. The United States—and by extension, the North American free trade area—should serve as a similar leading goose in the Western Hemisphere.

However, the whole-of-ecosystem approach may prove challenging or take considerable time and investment to materialize in certain sectors/products, e.g., when regional partners or the United States itself does not possess the specializations or technologies needed. In these cases, collaboration with trusted extra-regional allies and surgical interventions to tackle skills gaps or supply chain chokeholds can help to accelerate the process.

• Self-sustaining: Public sector investment and assistance through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the CHIPS Act are a first step in the right direction to push supply chains into the region (“push factors”). Efficient coordination with regional partners is important for financial, capacity, and competitiveness reasons. Many regional governments, while interested, may have limited fiscal space to develop these supply chains independently or have limited technical/industrial capabilities to qualify for US support (or learn how to qualify).

Creating US interagency roadmaps for hemispheric supply chain development, with private sector input, will be vital to building such capabilities in LAC to pull/attract investments (a key “pull factor”) and ensuring long-lasting success. Importantly, the roadmaps must also introduce a healthy degree of domestic competition, possibly through a sunset provision. Some of LAC’s unsuccessful industrialization attempts in the last century—characterized by import-substitution industrialization as opposed to East Asia’s export-oriented industrialization—generated uncompetitive firms and resource misallocation, offering a cautionary tale.

A US strategy designed to advance supply chain push and pull factors should also include local workforce development (a key element of APEP) and infrastructure development (from logistical to energy conditions necessary to ensure export competitiveness); synergy with US-led sector-specific initiatives (such as the Minerals Security Partnership); bilateral high-level dialogue mechanisms (similar to the US-Mexico High-level Dialogue, the US-Guatemala High-Level Dialogue, etc.); US support of regional initiatives such as the Alliance for Development in Democracy (ADD) Business Council’s Supply Chain Working Group, etc.

3. Development policy

Development policy tools increase supply chain competitiveness and broader economic resilience in LAC by nurturing additional pull factors conducive to nearshoring, such as project bankability, macroeconomic stability, physical infrastructure, skills and productivity, and disaster preparedness and response. ⁹ The United States has several unique tools at its disposal, both financial and nonfinancial, to support regional economic development.

• Financial: The most direct financial instruments of the US development toolbox are provided by US agencies such as USAID, DFC, USTDA, and EXIM. With varied priorities and operations, they can offer financing to advance US commercial and foreign policy interests while supporting local development needs. A growing focus and challenge for some of these agencies is to mobilize the private sector. For instance, on the investment side, although US companies have successfully led the United States to overtake the EU as LAC’s number one foreign investor, opportunities exist to unlock additional private sector investment if the agencies are authorized to more easily and substantially mitigate certain country and project risks.

The Washington-based international financial institutions (IFIs) are another distinctive asset for US development and foreign policy in LAC. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated once again that these organizations are more willing and capable—than their Chinese policy bank counterparts—to provide counter-cyclical support to LAC countries in need. Such support took place through the IMF’s liquidity or macro stabilization programs, as well as development operations from the IDB or the World Bank that directly boosted governments’ recovery and growth efforts, improved public infrastructure, health services, or skills training, or indirectly freed up additional fiscal resources for development. Though often underappreciated, the IFIs’ close coordination with the US Department of Treasury (their largest shareholder) contributes to hemispheric economic stability and development.

• Nonfinancial: Numerous US agencies drive development in LAC through a wide array of nonfinancial assistance and cooperation, including training programs organized or contracted by the Departments of Commerce, Treasury, State, Energy, and others. These programs build capacity among LAC public sector, private sector, and civil society beneficiaries, covering specific technical issues such as commercial laws, government procurement, independent journalism, illicit finance, etc.

Additional examples include the Department of Defense and US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM)’s security cooperation with countries affected by rising crime and violence, or their operational support for natural disaster preparedness and response in small, disaster-prone Caribbean Island states. While these efforts may not be economically focused by design, they generate immense economic value, by protecting lives, jobs, supply chains, the investment climate, and government balance sheets. They also foster goodwill. The fact that the US remains the region’s partner of choice in these noneconomic areas reflects the multi-dimensional, symbiotic nature of the US-LAC relationship. Hemispheric policymakers would do well to further explore these areas as complementary pathways toward greater economic integration.

IV. Recommendations

In summary, and with the Commission’s mandate in mind, I propose the following nine recommendations to advance US interest and leverage US strengths in topics covered by this testimony on three levels: The policy level, resource level, and strategy level.

Policy level
In coordination with the executive branch, Congress can help innovate and utilize US policy tools across three interconnected areas:

1. Trade Policy: Use tariff, nontariff, and complementary measures to strengthen hemispheric trade and integration under US leadership, without resorting to politically thorny market access issues. A key element here is to leverage the United States’ existing preferential trade agreements with twelve regional partners, as well as their resulting economic linkages and technical interoperability.
2. Industrial Policy: Nurture nearshoring push factors (US policies and incentives) and pull factors (regional competitiveness conditions) to build self-sustaining, whole-of-ecosystem productive capacity in LAC for certain sectors/products/supply chain segments. This includes formulating time-bound, US interagency roadmaps for hemispheric supply chain development, in coordination with regional partners and the private sector.
3. Development Policy: Enhance financial and nonfinancial (technical/operational) assistance from various US government agencies and Washington-based international financial institutions to strengthen economic development, resilience, and nearshoring pull factors in LAC. The goal is to create more competitive regional economies as well as more symbiotic economic partnerships with the United States.
   
   Resource level
   Congress can unlock resources pivotal to implementing and supporting the policy-level recommendations above, for example:
   
4. Increase resources to deploy more foreign service, development, commercial officers in ways that (a) advance US foreign policy and commercial interests in LAC across the trade, industrial, and development policy areas outlined above, including through APEP-related initiatives; (b) supporting regional development needs and capacity building; (c) deepen regionalized China expertise and capability, particularly through the Department of State’s Regional China Officers program.
5. Increase resources for public diplomacy efforts that better specify and highlight the value of positive US economic engagement in LAC. This includes measurable impact of US policy actions recommended above, as well as nongovernmental US accomplishments and facts, e.g., the United States consistently remains by far the region’s largest investor and trading partner in aggregate terms.
6. Optimize budgetary or financing rules for organizations like DFC and EXIM so they can meet the growing and evolving needs of the beneficiaries, expanding progress made in the Better Utilization of Investments Leading to Development Act of 2018 (“BUILD Act”).
7. Approve/Allocate resources to DC-headquartered international financial organizations—including the Inter-American Development Bank Group and the World Bank Group—for future capital increases and replenishments. These organizations are well-positioned to provide high-quality, impact-driven development assistance to LAC. Additionally, they can complement bilateral US efforts, as evidenced by the recently announced IDB Invest-DFC co-financing framework.
   
   Strategic level
   Through its legislative, policy, financial, and oversight authority, Congress can play a key role in guiding the strategic direction of US foreign policy towards LAC, in particular:
   
8. Draw more attention and resources to LAC. The US government including Congress must work to recalibrate regional perceptions of US neglect and advocate for a more active role for the United States in leading hemispheric economic integration. LAC has much to offer as a reliable partner in an evolving global context, and it is in US national interest that this neighboring region realizes its full potential. The recently introduced Americas Trade and Investment Act (“Americas Act”) is a promising endeavor in this regard.
9. Ensure coherence of US economic engagement with LAC. At a time when domestic political polarization across the region and in the United States is making hemispheric relations less stable and effective, Congress can play a key role in informing a high-level, bipartisan, and coherent US strategy towards LAC that better transcends electoral cycles. Recent executive-legislative efforts to connect APEP and the Americas Act are an encouraging signal in this regard.

The post Pepe Zhang provides testimony to the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission appeared first on Atlantic Council.

• Foreword
• Explainer video
• Related events

Foreword

Countries representing half the world’s population are voting in 2024. On June 2, just over five months before Election Day in the United States, Mexican voters will set a historic milestone with the election of the country’s first female president. Over the course of her six-year term, Mexico’s new president will face enormous challenges—internally and in the country’s relationship with the United States. But, like never before, there is also a unique opportunity to strengthen the commercial and economic ties that bind the two countries and reimagine how our shared border could better serve our shared interests.

Although the United States and Mexico have long been economically intertwined, in 2023, Mexico became the United States’ most important trading partner. Now more than ever,  with great geopolitical headwinds, the commercial ties that bind our two countries will be increasingly critical to advancing US economic interests globally. Here, greater border efficiency will yield economic gains alongside improvements in our shared security.

The Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, in partnership with internal and external colleagues and partners, sought to envision the future of two key aspects of the US-Mexico relationship: commercial flows and investment. With extensive feedback and numerous consultations with border stakeholders, including business owners, truck drivers, port operators, civilians, and local and federal elected officials, we sought out fresh perspectives and actionable recommendations. Our goal with this report is to spark dialogue among policymakers, business leaders, and civil society in both countries on the urgent need to address the immediate challenges of border efficiency and investment attraction over the next Mexican president’s term while paving the way for a more prosperous and secure future in our countries.

The Rio Grande and its surrounding towns are more than a physical barrier separating the United States and Mexico. Rather, they are a vibrant artery of commerce, migration, and cultural exchange. Livelihoods depend on our border, but inefficiencies prevent us from maximizing the possible economic opportunities and achieving the necessary security gains. The pages that follow build on previous center findings and emphasize the need for a nuanced approach to foreign investment, infrastructure development, and security measures that prioritize efficiency and our national interests.

This publication also seeks to bring the human dimension to the forefront. Public policy, after all, should reflect how to improve everyday lives. We consolidate the stories of real people affected by the US-Mexico border daily. The combined stories we have gathered over the last two years remind us of the impact of policy decisions. That reminder is particularly poignant with the 2024 elections on both sides of the border. Indeed, we stand on the cusp of a new chapter in our shared history.

This report is a call to action for visionary leadership and bold, pragmatic solutions to the complex issues facing the United States and Mexico. We urge policymakers to embrace policies and strategies that address immediate challenges while laying the groundwork for both an even more inclusive and prosperous future. Let’s seize this unique moment in time.

Jason Marczak
Vice President and Senior Director
Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Online Event Thu, May 23, 2024 • 1:00 pm ET

Mexico’s path forward: A conversation with Ildefonso Guajardo

Ildefonso Guajardo discusses Xóchitl Gálvez’s view on a more efficient US-Mexico border and increased opportunities of economic investment.

Economy & Business Elections Latin America Mexico

Online Event Thu, May 23, 2024 • 2:30 pm ET

Mexico’s path forward: A conversation with Diana Alarcón

Diana Alarcón discusses Claudia Sheinbaum’s view on a more efficient US-Mexico border and increased opportunities of economic investment.

Economy & Business Elections Inclusive Growth Latin America

The Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center broadens understanding of regional transformations and delivers constructive, results-oriented solutions to inform how the public and private sectors can advance hemispheric prosperity.

Learn more

The post With the 2024 Mexican election looming, here are two major recommendations for the next president appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Severe weather is not a new phenomenon for the state, which has seen record-breaking rainfall in recent years. A foretold tragedy, the flooding in Rio Grande do Sul is the fourth weather-related crisis to hit the state in less than a year. At the end of 2023, Rio Grande do Sul saw a similar situation, when a heat wave exacerbated intense storms and major flooding.

The region is prone to weather-related disasters, and the current flooding has been linked to the periodic El Niño weather phenomenon. In the past few decades, the state’s capital city, Porto Alegre, has adapted to control the extent of the impact of torrential rains on the city. However, the infrastructure in place must be updated to the new reality of extreme weather events, which are more intense due to climate change. Designing suitable financial instruments for resilient infrastructure with support from international and domestic financial institutions will be crucial.

The extent of this disaster is immense. To put it into perspective, about 90 percent of the 497 municipalities in Rio Grande do Sul were impacted by the rain and flooding. Brazilians are bearing the immediate brunt of these floods, including on their economy. There will also be implications for global trade and food security in the weeks and months ahead.

Rio Grande do Sul is an important state for Brazil. It represents 6 percent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP), the fifth largest state GDP in the country. A major agribusiness state, it accounts for 70 percent of Brazil’s rice production. It is a significant producer of soybeans—of which Brazil is a leading producer and exporter—and an important meat-producing state. And while in Rio Grande do Sul rain continues to fall, not too far from there, in other regions of Brazil, farmers are suffering through a winter drought.

The governor of Rio Grande do Sul, Eduardo Leite, estimates that a yearslong reconstruction plan costing some nineteen billion reais (around $3.7 billion) will be needed in his state. Private sector investments and insurance could play a crucial role in supporting the recovery of the region, implementing adaptation measures and building the resilience of the affected communities. This level of support now will be critical to reduce future losses and tap into the immense economic, social, and environmental benefits of investing in adaptation and resilience. According to one recent estimate, each dollar invested in resilience and adaptation could generate up to twelve dollars in economic benefits.

Local and federal governments must take on the responsibility to put climate adaptation at the core of their strategic plans and development efforts. Countries must prioritize adaptation and resilience investment plans that strategically crowd in private sector investments and ensure that subnational governments and local communities can access insurance and financing to adapt and build resilience. Brazil is in a unique position to do so. With Brazilian municipal elections in October, this is a crucial moment for Brazilians to institutionalize climate mitigation and adaption efforts as part of local governments’ agendas.

At the geopolitical level, the G20 Leaders’ Summit in Rio de Janeiro in November will be an opportunity for Brazil to drive the climate adaptation agenda forward and to obtain buy-in and financing from the largest economies in the world. COP30 in Belém, Brazil, in 2025 is another such opportunity. The site for COP30, located in the Amazon rainforest in Brazil’s north, was chosen in part to showcase the roles of biodiversity, sustainability, and conservation in climate action. The flooding in the country’s south will be a tragic reminder of the importance of adaptation being central to the climate agenda, as well.

Valentina Sader is a deputy director at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, where she leads the Center’s work on Brazil, gender equality and diversity, and manages the Center’s Advisory Council.

The post Brazil’s tragic floods should put climate adaptation at the top of the G20 and COP agendas appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Mulino was elected with 34 percent of the vote in a single-round election featuring eight presidential candidates. Emerging with a narrow victory and having secured only fifteen out of seventy-one seats in the National Assembly between Realizando Metas and Partido Alianza combined, Mulino’s first order of business must be to unite a country that seems unlikely to give its new president a honeymoon period. However, to reach a working majority in this highly fragmented National Assembly, the new administration will need to broaden its outreach without falling prey to the vices of the past, namely coalition-building through patronage and corrupt dealings. The new government’s success hinges upon the president-elect’s ability to build national consensus quickly.

To do so, Mulino should start with the economy.

Building inclusive economic opportunity

Panama’s economic story is defined by an unusually fast but lopsided rise to become the wealthiest country in Latin America in gross domestic product (GDP) per capita terms, propelled by economic growth at an unparalleled rate in the region. Panama’s GDP per capita is comparable to those of Greece and Croatia, but that average hides a great deal of imbalance within the country. The GDP per capita of the two provinces adjacent to the Panama Canal is roughly ten times higher than that of the Darién province that borders Colombia. Darién’s GDP per capita is similar to that of Haiti, the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. In the two most populous indigenous communities, more than 90 percent of the population lives in multidimensional poverty—that is, a lack of sufficient income, education, healthcare, and access to infrastructure.

Panamanians held mass protests as recently as July-August 2022 and October-November 2023—the largest that the country had seen in decades—and the incoming administration will face continued pressure to transform the country’s economy to ensure lasting and inclusive growth. Mulino’s administration will need to address disparities and structural impediments, including territorial inequalities, gaps in access to and quality of public goods and services (water, electricity, sanitation, education, healthcare, transportation, and technology), and pension system reform. However, the delicate state of Panama’s finances will require remarkable policy ingenuity to invest smartly. The incoming administration must deploy carefully calibrated policies, such as special economic zones, to develop strategic industries beyond the Panama Canal region. It must also leverage Panama’s carbon-negative status to create room in the government budget through climate finance tools.

To fully address these inequalities, however, the incoming administration will also need to reform Panama’s institutions.

Strengthening and modernizing institutions

In the past decade, discussions about strengthening Panamanian institutions have typically focused on optimizing for transparency and efficiency, and with good reason. Each year for over a decade, corruption is estimated to have cost Panama the equivalent of 1 percent of its GDP. In addition, Panama’s large bureaucracy—accounting for 17 percent of its overall workforce, the second-largest share of public sector employees in Latin America—has not translated into robust state capacity to deliver public goods and services and collect tax revenues commensurate with Panama’s level of income. This inefficiency is connected to the practice of clientelism, whereby the Panamanian bureaucracy has been co-opted by the distribution of privileges (including jobs, discretionary budgets, scholarships, and goods) in exchange for political support. In addition to longstanding concerns about efficiency and transparency, the uncertainties, institutional frailties, and gaps in existing legislation exposed in the 2024 election cycle call for an additional focus on democratic stability.

The next administration and the National Assembly will have multiple tools at their disposal to address these challenges. To mitigate clientelism, Panama should adopt a two-pronged approach. First, the Panamanian government will need to improve access to and the quality of public services and infrastructure, thus meeting citizens’ needs and addressing the root causes of problems. Too often, politicians have sought self-interested “quick fixes” to problems that do not address underlying causes. Second, Panama should implement legislation to build a professional civil service where hiring and firing are based on merit rather than party loyalty. Talented civil servants should encounter job security and strong incentives to work in the bureaucracy long term, and their performance should be measured and reviewed periodically.

During the campaign, various candidates including Mulino promised to carry out constitutional reforms, which could be leveraged to strengthen checks and balances and improve representation in Panama’s electoral system. The National Assembly can also contribute to bolstering government accountability by appointing a comptroller general who is independent from the governing party.

Reaffirming Panama’s position in global supply chains

Panama’s location is one of its most valuable assets, shaping the country’s role as a global trade and logistics hub and enabling the development of its international services platform. Each year, 5 percent of global maritime trade and 14 percent of maritime trade into and out of the United States crosses the Panama Canal. In a typical year, thirty-seven ships go through the Panama Canal every day, requiring roughly two billion gallons of fresh water, mostly drawn from nearby lakes. To put that in perspective, that is twice as much as New York City’s daily water demand. In 2023, Panama faced one of the three driest years in over a century, primarily as a result of El Niño, prompting the Panama Canal Authority to implement temporary transit restrictions.

To understand how the canal might approach climate-proofing its operations to ensure normal transit levels even in extraordinarily dry years, it is crucial to understand how it works. The Panama Canal is a state-owned enterprise (SOE) with a robust institutional framework—including a section of the Panamanian constitution—that has protected the canal from the mismanagement concerns typically associated with SOEs. The fact that this has remained the case in an otherwise weak institutional context is both surprising and essential to the way that the Panama Canal has become efficient, profitable, and pivotal to unlocking development around it.

However, it also means that there are things that the Panama Canal Authority cannot do without government approval, including modifying the limits of its watershed and building a new reservoir. In 2023, the Panama Canal’s Board of Directors presented a proposal encompassing those two requests to the government as part of its strategy to safeguard the canal’s operations as droughts are expected to become more frequent and intense. Now, the ball is the Panamanian government’s court to determine which of the options presented by the Canal Authority it is willing to authorize.

Besides evaluating the best pathways to climate-proof the canal, the Mulino administration should seek to strengthen Panama’s logistics platform beyond the canal. Improvements in port management and road connectivity present remarkable opportunities that Panama has yet to capitalize on.

By implementing these changes, the Mulino administration will be able to place Panama on a path of inclusive and sustainable development that is enabled rather than hindered by the quality of its institutions.

Felipe Félix Méndez is an assistant director at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center and is originally from Panama.

The post Panama has a new president. José Raúl Mulino should focus on these three priorities. appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Colombia, a key US security and trading partner in South America, needs to soothe markets and solidify its economic recovery through a mix of political pragmatism, compromise, and a commitment to deepening investment. Economic stewardship is key both to securing reform and long-term development.

Economic challenges

Many Latin American economies have been buffeted in recent years, as the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine each took a toll. For Colombia, it was a nearly 9 percent hit to its gross domestic product (GDP) in 2020 and a 13.1 percent rise in consumer prices in 2022. Combined, these factors prompted the previous administration of Iván Duque as well as the Petro administration in its early days (the last quarter of 2022) to adopt a series of countercyclical recovery programs to get the economy back on track.

Colombia’s economy has seen mixed indicators in recent years. On the one hand, unemployment remained at around 11 percent and inflation decreased to 9 percent in 2023, while on the other hand the economy grew only by 1.2 percent, below the Finance Ministry’s forecast of 1.8 percent growth and lagging behind other countries in the region. During 2023, for example, Colombia’s GDP growth was lower than the growth reported by Venezuela (5 percent), Panama (4.6 percent), the Dominican Republic (4.6 percent), Guatemala (3.2 percent), Honduras (3 percent), Costa Rica (2.7 percent), and Nicaragua (2.3 percent). Yet other economic fundamentals, such as the exchange rate, seem to be stabilizing, and interest rates are expected to follow the same trend or move downward. Forecasts for Colombia’s 2024 GDP growth range from 1.3 percent to 1.8 percent, and its annual inflation rate dropped in the first trimester of 2024 but is still among the highest in the region, at 7.4 percent.

Signals to the private sector

This coming August, Petro will hit the halfway point in his four-year term, and he is ineligible to seek reelection. If current trends continue, he will meet that milestone while overseeing lackluster economic growth; failing to advance his stymied health reform while other reform proposals languish in Congress; and facing scrutiny for the implementation of his 2022 tax reform, with aspects of it being challenged in the Constitutional Court.

Petro—who has expressed frustration with the forces impeding his agenda—backtracked from a campaign promise this year. In 2018, Petro literally carved into a marble tablet a list of promises to reassure critics who swore he would take the country down the same path of political extremism and erosion of democracy as Nicolás Maduro in neighboring Venezuela. One “commandment” was to refrain from convening a National Constituent Assembly to revise the country’s constitution. In March, however, he proposed convening a National Constituent Assembly, the first since 1991, to address six different issues that are stalled in the legislature. The proposal is unlikely to proceed given his lack of support in Congress, and any attempt to advance it through decree would be blocked by the courts. On top of this, Petro has lost the support of most Colombians: more than 60 percent of Colombians disapprove of his administration, according to an April 9 survey by Invamer.

Nonetheless, the polarizing constitutional reform proposal has generated further uncertainty about the country’s policy direction and economic expectations, both unwelcome drags on Colombia’s private-sector investment climate. Other issues contributing to concerns in the private sector include a 10 percent decline in imports of goods and services and a 16 percent drop in new business investment. Likewise, the slow disbursement of public spending in many government agencies has raised eyebrows because state spending is the main driver of employment in remote regions, particularly with infrastructure and housing development.

Three steps to shift this dynamic

The conventional wisdom in Colombian politics is that a good economy will help even an unpopular government find a way to advance its agenda with minimal resistance. But in order for this maxim to apply to the Petro administration, the president would need to make some significant changes to shift the current dynamic.

First, he would need to spur more coordination with the private sector to stoke investment and shore up the country’s reputation as a destination for companies. For instance, the government’s reindustrialization program provides an important opportunity, if implemented as planned, to foster cooperation and coordination with domestic and foreign private-sector entities interested in investing in Colombia. This program opens the door for new business ventures in areas that are critical for the country’s development. A good place to start would be for the national government and the private sector to work jointly on incentives that can help quickly spur investment in critical sectors such as infrastructure, tourism, health, digital communications.

Second, Petro would need to build consensus around the reforms he is seeking to advance in Congress. This will be essential to find a way to address Colombia’s most pressing needs—without undoing decades of stable economic and political development.

Third, the president should recognize that the outlook for Colombia’s economy matters to the United States as well. Despite ongoing debate over coca eradication efforts, Colombia remains the closest US ally in the region in the fight against drug trafficking. It is also the leading destination for US agricultural exports in South America and the third-largest in the Western Hemisphere overall, a position that has been secured by a free trade agreement that prioritizes investment in the country.

The US private sector can be an important catalyst in the development of Petro’s reindustrialization agenda. Post-pandemic changes in supply chains open up opportunities to invest in just such a friendly, nearby market. Colombia also has a rising middle class and the expanding consumption that entails, as well as the prospect of new revenue from Colombian exports to neighboring Venezuela and other countries across the region.

The rest of this year will be a crucial test for Petro’s economic stewardship. If managed successfully, he can bolster the country’s growth trajectory. To do so, he will have to both spend public funds wisely and do so in a way that works hand in hand with international investors and with the support of partners such as the United States. The necessary actions will be his to initiate—but the impact of such outreach and development would extend well beyond his term.

Enrique Millan-Mejia is a consultant and project manager at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center and a former senior trade and investment diplomat of the government of Colombia to the United States.

Geoff Ramsey is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

The post Colombia’s president must focus on economic stewardship in the second half of his term appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Sign up for PowerPlay, the Atlantic Council’s bimonthly newsletter keeping you up to date on all facets of the energy transition.

The commitment of “phasing out coal by 2035 or on a timeline consistent with the 1.5 temperature limit” marks a further step in the direction indicated last year by the UN climate summit, known as COP28, to reduce the use of fossil fuels, of which coal is the most polluting. Mentioning the IEA’s Net-Zero Roadmap report, G7 countries say that “phase-out of unabated coal is needed by 2030s in advanced economies and by 2040 in all the other regions, and that no new unabated coal power plant should be built.” This represents the first agreement on a timeline for phasing out coal after the initiative had previously failed due to opposition by some members. However, it should be noted that, despite the positive step towards a common goal, by using the term “unabated” in the communication, members of the G7 leave open a potential path for the use of coal beyond the indicated timeline. 

In addition to the importance of ending coal reliance, it is now widely recognized that the success of the energy transition is linked to a technology-inclusive approach both for reaching climate neutrality and strengthening energy security. The communication of the G7 promotes members’ increasing use of diverse low-carbon energy technologies including renewable energy, energy efficiency, hydrogen, carbon management, storage, nuclear energy, and fusion.

Energy ministers fully committed to the “implementation of the global goal of tripling installation of renewable energy capacity by 2030 to at least 11 terawatts (TW)” and to “double the global average annual rate of energy efficiency improvements by 2030 to 4%,” signaling the intention to create a strong connection with COP28 pledges.

On energy storage, G7 members agreed to a global goal in the power sector of 1500 gigawatts (GW) in 2030, a more than six-fold increase from 2022. Introducing this target for storage is very important to support renewable implementation and ultimately reach the installation capacity target set in Dubai.

The communication highlights the importance for countries to reduce reliance on civil nuclear technologies from Russia and commits to strengthening the resilience of the nuclear supply chain. Countries opting for nuclear energy would work to deploy next generation nuclear reactors.

Fusion made it in the final text with a strong emphasis on the potential of this technology to provide a lasting solution to the global challenges of climate change and energy security in the future, marking an important addition to the G7 joint communication, since in the Hiroshima Communique, fusion was not mentioned.

In order to implement these targets and scale technologies, the G7 countries this year also reaffirmed their commitment to jointly mobilize $100 billion per year until 2025 and their intention to scale up public and private finance. “We stress the need to accelerate efforts to make finance flow consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development,” and “we acknowledge that such efforts involve the alignment of the domestic and international financial system.” Attention is now directed toward the upcoming G7 finance meeting, the G20 in Brazil, and the “finance COP” in Azerbaijan.

Finally, convergence and cooperation with countries outside the G7 will play a crucial role in the success of the transition. The joint communication acknowledges that developing countries represent “an important partner in the just energy transition” and recognizes “the great potential of the African continent in becoming a global powerhouse of the future.”

At this year’s energy ministerial meetings, Azerbaijan’s Deputy Minister on Energy Elnur Soltanov (representing the 2024 COP29 presidency), Brazil’s Minister of the Environment and Climate Change Marina Silva (representing the 2024 G20 presidency), and Kenya’s Principal Secretary on Energy Alex K. Wachira, participated along with the G7 partners. This approach shows recognition of the fundamental role that inclusivity plays in a successful transition and the willingness to create strong synergies with the upcoming multilateral forums.

It would be difficult to overstate just how critical pragmatism and convergence are to the energy transition. But this message, in addition to being successfully incorporated in the communication was further reinforced during the Future of Energy Summit, a half-day event hosted by the Atlantic Council Global Energy Center, Politecnico di Torino, and World Energy Council Italy as part of Planet Week on the sidelines of last weekend’s G7 ministerial meeting. Experts and speakers at the Summit emphasized the need to strengthen a technology-inclusive, not exclusive, approach and cooperation among countries.

The IEA’s Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario (NZE) envisages that by 2030, advanced economies would end all power generation by unabated coal-fired plants, making the new G7 historic commitment unfit for purpose. However, the overall success of the transition will not be determined by pledges, but more so by the will of countries to transform pledges into action. Whether G7 countries will be able to succeed in the energy transition will depend on their capacity to create resilient clean energy supply chains, implement diversified energy mixes, promote collaboration with developing countries, scale up public and private finance, and it seems like many steps are being taken in the right direction. 

Elena Benaim is a nonresident fellow with the Atlantic Council Global Energy Center.

EnergySource

EnergySource is the Global Energy Center’s (GEC) online publication providing commentary and analysis on developments in the energy and climate sector from a wide-array of thought leaders, politicians, and experts.

Read more

Related content

EnergySource Apr 3, 2024

Central and Eastern Europe needs to rethink its approach to energy security

By Pawel Czyzak and Nolan Theisen

The upcoming Three Seas Initiative Summit is an opportune time for Central and Eastern European leaders to pivot toward clean, affordable, and local renewables to build energy security.

Central Asia Central Europe

EnergySource Dec 13, 2023

The US and NATO must clamp down on Russian fossil fuels to end the war in Ukraine

By Svitlana Romanko and Oleh Savytskyi

The US and its EU allies have made several attempts to diminish Russia’s fossil fuel exports, with mixed results. the West must do more to staunch the flow of Russian oil and gas—and restore peace for Ukraine.

Energy & Environment Energy Markets & Governance

EnergySource Dec 5, 2023

The Oil and Gas Decarbonization Charter is a start, but more work remains

By David L. Goldwyn, Andrea Clabough

Although the Oil and Gas Decarbonization Charter is laudable, the pace of change for this industry (as represented in this charter) is not fast enough, deep enough, or broad enough to materially address the yawning gap between the Paris commitments and the present Dubai reality.

Energy & Environment Energy Markets & Governance

Learn more about the Global Energy Center

The Global Energy Center develops and promotes pragmatic and nonpartisan policy solutions designed to advance global energy security, enhance economic opportunity, and accelerate pathways to net-zero emissions.

learn more

The post G7 pledges to end coal—but only inclusive action will make a real climate impact appeared first on Atlantic Council.

The region has an urgent need to prepare for the scope of climate change. Many of the region’s countries rely on tourism to drive economic growth, with ten of the world’s twenty most tourism-dependent economies residing in the Caribbean. When hurricanes roll through the region, damaging infrastructure and halting flights, the tourism industry halts as well, diminishing economic prospects. Most Caribbean countries face the brunt of the Atlantic hurricane season, which is producing stronger and more frequent tropical storms. At the same time, most of the region’s populous cities are coastal, making sea level rise a threat to homes and the day-to-day functions of society. Further, changing precipitation patterns and higher average temperatures result in agricultural degradation and more acidic oceans, decreasing crop yields in rural areas and limiting fishery supplies.

While the entire region faces daunting consequences from climate change and related natural disasters, women and girls face disproportionate effects across four areas.

First, women and girls are “especially vulnerable to sexual violence and coercion” in the wake of a natural disaster, according to the United Nations Population Fund. This risk includes and extends beyond domestic violence, which is known to spike in crisis situations, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic in Trinidad and Tobago. Disproportionate risks mount, the World Bank notes, “in the face of uprooted housing and traditional support structures, disrupted access to services, and both structural and social obstacles to accessing food, relief, supplies, and latrines.” A lack of privacy and security in shelters is problematic, especially for young and teenage girls.

Second, women are responsible for a greater share of caregiving for families and households. After Hurricane María knocked out the power grid in Puerto Rico and made potable water scarce, it was women who bore a greater burden in doing the cooking, laundry, and cleaning to keep households going. Moreover, across multiple climate change events, when schools close, women with school-age children are often unable to return to work or attend school themselves.

Third, Caribbean women tend to work in the informal economy, including small-scale businesses and the hospitality sector, both of which are adversely affected by tropical storms. Storms can damage crops and roads, making it difficult to get produce to markets, while also leaving restaurants, shops, and hotels closed for days, affecting incomes.

Finally, women often have unequal access to finance, capital, and other assets, which can affect their resilience after a disaster. In addition, as governments finance the reconstruction of damaged infrastructure after natural disasters and fortify existing structures, there are fewer resources devoted to the education and health sectors—both of which are integral to providing care to and lifting family responsibility burdens from women.

Caribbean governments and regional partners must factor in the disproportionate challenges facing women and girls at the earliest stages of climate resilience and adaptation policymaking. Policy designs should incorporate government funding or subsidies dedicated to women-owned businesses adversely affected by climate change. Historically, Caribbean women face barriers to accessing finance and capital to start or invest in their businesses. Limited track records in operating a business relative to men and frequent climate events increase the risk profiles for women-owned firms. Here, governments can work with regional institutions like the Caribbean Development Bank to level the playing field for women-owned firms by providing grants to businesses in climate-affected sectors, like hospitality and agricultural work.

Further, resources can and should be dedicated to women-owned firms that are physically affected by climate events and to create shelters where at-risk women and girls can stay after natural disasters to limit spaces where gender-based violence can occur. This should include shelters that can care for children and allow working parents to return to their jobs to offset the disproportionate costs borne by women resulting from family responsibilities.

Involving women in policy designs also includes making them part of the decision-making process. Only women and girls can provide first-hand information to contextualize policies and streamline resources that address the unique challenges they face due to climate change. One way to do this is to incorporate perspectives from gender-focused civil society organizations.

Civil society organizations are uniquely intertwined with the realities of each country at national and subnational levels, allowing them to understand the day-to-day challenges facing women and girls across different communities. Governments can work with civil society organizations to ensure that policies are not blanket approaches but are bottom-up in nature, so that each community of women and girls receive the resources and attention they require. Regular consultation with these groups, particularly in the advent of hurricane season, during rainy seasons, and in the lead-up to drier months can provide real-time insights into the types of government resources that should be devoted to women and girls.

Given that the Caribbean is a heterogeneous region, with different climate events affecting different countries, it is essential for policy design and decision making to be country-specific as well as gender inclusive to best serve local populations. Climate change does not have to result in increasing gender inequity in the Caribbean—as long as the voices and interests of women and girls are incorporated in policy design and resource allocation in regional planning to combat climate change.

Wazim Mowla is the associate director and fellow for the Caribbean Initiative at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center. 

This article is part of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center’s partnership with the UN Women Multi-Country Office–Caribbean.

The post Climate change doesn’t have to result in greater gender inequity in the Caribbean appeared first on Atlantic Council.

According to recent studies, violence against women in Mexico has surged, with more than 70 percent of Mexico’s 50.5 million women and girls over the age of fifteen experiencing some form of violence. This brutal reality is heightened by the fact that many crimes in Mexico often go unreported, hindering governmental efforts to address the disproportionate impact of criminal violence on women in rural states such as Veracruz, Oaxaca, and Chiapas. It is a serious problem in Mexico, and it is also a concern for its northern neighbor. It’s in the United States’ best interest to take a closer look at the increased effect of organized crime on women in Mexico and the growing migration pressures it is generating.

It is no secret that Mexico stands as one of the most violent countries for women. For years, Mexico has struggled with inadequate resources and institutions to safeguard victims and prosecute offenders.

Even urban areas such as Mexico City, which have more access to resources and investment than rural areas, have struggled to create a holistic security agenda that can ensure women’s safety. However, between February 2020 and 2024, the incidence of femicide in the capital decreased by 20 percent, according to the Secretariat of Citizen Security in Mexico City. Although this value does not encompass the full dimension of the violence women face in Mexico, the decrease may be a result of certain components of the city’s security agenda. This agenda includes implementing gender-sensitive training for military and police personnel, bolstering female representation in law enforcement, improving access to mental-health and victim-support services, and streamlining abuse reporting mechanisms through preventative policing measures.  

The most severe violence against women predominantly occurs in remote Mexican states characterized by pervasive poverty and the presence of criminal organizations. States such as Oaxaca, Veracruz, and Chiapas, plagued by poverty and host to multiple cartels, pose significant threats to women’s safety. These states are notorious for their danger to women, even though they do not always report the highest number of femicides or other cases of gender-based violence given the fear of victims to come forward and lower law-enforcement presence. A 2021 United Nations Development Programme study in Mexico indicates that in areas controlled by drug cartels, violence against women intensifies, with relatives often refraining from reporting crimes out of fear of retribution. Such violence becomes a tool of intimidation and a display of dominance for these criminal groups, perpetuating a cycle of violence. These mostly rural states serve as hubs for organized crime due to weak state presence and proximity to key transit routes. As a result, the convergence of poverty, crime, and violence has prompted mass emigration to urban centers and the United States, particularly among vulnerable populations.

To address this dire situation, it is important for the administration that takes office later this year to pay closer attention to violence against women in these states. To start with, reliable data is needed. In Mexico, an estimated 93 percent of crimes go unreported. In 2023, 2,580 women were murdered but only 830 were categorized as femicides. Strengthening transparent and trustworthy institutions that collect accurate data in these areas is crucial to fostering an environment where victims feel safe to come forward.

Security plans that have shown some success in urban areas are often difficult to apply as a whole in more rural areas, due to the lack of infrastructure and resources. However, there are certain transferable steps that can help improve women’s safety. For instance, recruiting more and better female police officers to ensure greater representation in police forces can make women feel safer when coming forward about their experiences. Failure to address these urgent needs perpetuates inequality and undermines Mexico’s potential as an economic powerhouse.

Furthermore, the increase in gender-based violence in Veracruz, Oaxaca, and Chiapas is greatly impacting migration dynamics, particularly toward those migrating to the United States. A 2021 report from the International Organization for Migration sheds light on the reasons behind this migration trend, revealing that 11 percent of respondents left Mexico due to gender violence. Moreover, 7 percent of those women interviewed mentioned encounters between criminal groups as a main reason for migrating. This migration pattern shows the immense need for addressing the root causes of gender-based violence in rural Mexican states, as it directly influences migration flows and exacerbates the ongoing migration crisis at the US-Mexico border.

The United States can help address gender-based violence in rural Mexican areas. For example, the US State Department’s Safe from the Start ReVisioned program is dedicated to eradicating all forms and threats of gender-based violence that women and girls encounter. Given adequate resources and attention, such collaborative efforts between the US and Mexican authorities can bolster capacities to prevent and respond to violence effectively. Other potential initiatives, such as skills transfer, training in conflict resolution, and trauma-informed care programs, can empower local communities to address violence comprehensively. By implementing innovative strategies and comprehensive support services, the incoming Mexican administration, along with its US counterpart, can make important progress in addressing the root causes of gender-based violence while cracking down on organized crime and undocumented migration.

As Mexico prepares for this year’s historic election, there is a unique opportunity to prioritize the issue of gender-based violence and enact meaningful change. Now more than ever, it is imperative for political leaders to recognize the urgency of this issue and commit to implementing policies and programs that prioritize the safety and empowerment of women, particularly in rural Mexican states.

Charlene Aguilera is a program assistant in the Caribbean Initiative at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

Isabel Chiriboga is an assistant director at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

The post Mexico’s next president must address violence against women in rural areas appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On April 19th, Global China Hub Nonresident Senior Fellow Didi Kirsten Tatlow published an article in Newsweek regarding the expansion of Chinese state-owned companies and aligned private businesses in Antigua and Barbuda and other Caribbean countries.

The post Global China Hub Nonresident Senior Fellow Didi Kirsten Tatlow in Newsweek appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On April 17th, Global China Hub Nonresident Senior Fellow Parsifal D’Sola published a report on the United States Institute of Peace on Huawei’s expansion in Latin America and the Caribbean and examined its role as a major provider of information and communications technology in the region.

The post Global China Hub Nonresident Senior Fellow Parsifal D’Sola in the United States Institute of Peace appeared first on Atlantic Council.

The post IMF-World Bank Week events and G20 evening reception mentioned in Politico appeared first on Atlantic Council.

For well over a year, DPI discussions have simmered in capitals around the world, drawing in policymakers, diplomats, and development experts alike. As a quick primer on DPI, think of it as the digital equivalent of laying down highways and bridges, but for the virtual world. Just as physical infrastructure drives economic growth, investing in DPI can propel inclusive development at a societal scale. Identity, payments, and data exchange platforms are often cited as the core building blocks of DPI, mirroring the multilayered structure of India’s famous homegrown technology stack.

India has been a trailblazer in deploying DPI at home and globalizing the DPI model. With its Group of Twenty (G20) presidency in 2023, New Delhi championed DPI on the world stage, securing political buy-in for the concept at the highest levels. G20 digital ministers endorsed a framework to govern the design, development, and deployment of DPI last August. And with the unanimous endorsement of G20 leaders, the New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration from last November set the stage for accelerated DPI development in 2024.

However, as the G7’s foray into the DPI arena reveals, the conversation is far from over. There are still different views of what DPI is and ought to be, as well as how it should shape the way markets function. Contrasting the G7 and G20 ministerial texts on DPI reveal three important areas of contention.

Differing visions

First, there’s the question of scope and purpose: Should DPI focus on enhancing public service delivery by governments or seek to restructure markets and delivery of private services? The G7 ministerial text opts for a narrower focus, solely emphasizing DPI’s role in enhancing citizen access to public services delivered by governments, while the G20 imagines a more expansive canvas, where DPI serves as a conduit for “equitable access” to both public and private services. This distinction is not merely academic; it gets to the core of what makes DPI novel and contested.

What does it mean to use DPI to enable equitable access to private services at a societal scale? It’s an evolving concept, but the basic thrust is to leverage the design, deployment, and governance of DPI to “dynamically create and shape new markets” and advance policy goals. For example, with a market-shaping DPI in place, a system operator, often the state itself, can define technical standards for private service providers to ensure interoperability. It can cap market share to give force to its vision of competition policy. It can influence pricing and business strategies through system rules and design features, with the DPI operator playing the role of “market orchestrator.” This is a different paradigm for the digital economy than a traditional market-led model—and to DPI champions, that’s precisely the point.

Second, consider the motivations for deploying DPI: Should these include advancing competition policy objectives? When describing the objectives for deploying DPI, G7 ministers borrow from the G20 framework but make a notable omission: There is no reference to “competition” as a core rationale for DPI. This omission is fully consistent with the G7’s vision of DPI, narrowly focused on public service delivery by governments. For the G7, the task of building competitive markets for the private sector is left to national regulators and antitrust authorities, not DPI builders and operators.

By contrast, the G20’s framework invokes the role of DPI in promoting competition twice, and that’s no accident. All governments want competitive digital ecosystems, but some see overexposure to Western tech giants as compounding the risks posed by pure market concentration alone. In this context, deployment of DPI serves two related purposes: disrupting entrenched incumbent positions while increasing state capacity to offer core digital services that reduce reliance on Western tech firms.

Third, what about design principles? Should DPI require open-source tech and open standards? The G7 ministerial statement omits all specific references to open source or open standards; instead, it vigorously defends the role of the private sector in building interoperable elements of DPI, presumably using open or proprietary technologies. In comparison, the G20’s DPI framework pointedly and repeatedly emphasizes the need for open software, open standards, and open application programming interfaces (APIs). Ultimately, however, the G20 statement hedges on this question, stating that DPI can be built on “open source and/or proprietary solutions, as well as a combination of both.”

Nevertheless, speak to DPI theorists shaping G20 and Global South thinking on DPI, and it’s clear they see “openness” as a defining principle of well-built DPI, citing the role open architectures, open-source tech, and open APIs play in enabling transparency, scale, interoperability, and reduced risk of vendor lock-in. Still, fuzziness around the term “openness” and its application in some of the largest DPI systems deployed to date suggests there is much left to unpack.

How will the G7 engage with DPI going forward?

It’s clear that the G7’s vision for DPI differs from the G20’s in at least three important areas. The question that remains is what comes next: How will the G7 (or its member states) assert their point of view?

The G7’s ministerial text offers some early clues. It acknowledges that G7 members will have “different approaches to the development of digital solutions, including DPI” and notes that the upcoming G7 Compendium on Digital Government Services will collect “relevant examples of digital public services from G7 members.” The compendium would also summarize factors that have led to “successful deployment and use of digital government services, such as national strategies, investment, public procurement practices, governance frameworks, and partnerships.”

Developing the compendium is a good start. But looking ahead, G7 members will need to weigh in this year at fast-moving multilateral discussions during Brazil’s G20 presidency, for instance, or within the United Nations’ multiple DPI workstreams. In each case, G7 perspectives on corporate governance, privacy, market disciplines, and regulatory best practices will strengthen discussions and outcomes, just as the G20’s and the Global South’s focus on inclusion, competition, and openness help ground the conversation in public interest concerns. The push and pull of the different visions for DPI could yield a better outcome for all—that’s the optimistic case.

A pessimist may insist that the gaps between the G7 and G20 views on DPI are tough to bridge. And it’s true, there is a real difference between a DPI scoped for public service delivery and one intended to shape the structure of digital markets and digital services offered by the private sector. If the latter view of DPI holds, G7 member states may need to find new ways to constructively participate in global DPI discussions. This could involve promoting individual layers of the DPI stack, as the G7 is already doing with digital ID governance, and emphasizing the need for sustainable public-private partnerships for DPI build-out. 

Ultimately, time will tell how the G7 chooses to lean into the global DPI debate. The only certainty is that the G7’s active engagement isn’t optional anymore—it’s essential.

Anand Raghuraman is a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center, where he leads research initiatives on US-India digital cooperation and publishes expert commentary on Indian data governance and digital policy initiatives. He is also director of global public policy at Mastercard.

Mastercard, through its Policy Center for the Digital Economy, is a financial supporter of an Atlantic Council project on digital public infrastructure.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect those of Mastercard.

The post What should digital public infrastructure look like? The G7 and G20 offer contrasting visions. appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Click to jump to an expert analysis:

Jason Marczak: The US must ensure sanctions carve outs benefit the Venezuelan people, not just elites

Geoff Ramsey: The US balances democracy promotion with a ‘complex geopolitical reality’

David Goldwyn: The US is seeking a Goldilocks solution to sanctions on Venezuela

Ellen Wald: With US sanctions waivers withdrawn, expect China to dominate Venezuela’s oil exports

Jesse Sucher: Sanctions should change behavior. The US chose to reinforce that principle.

The US must ensure sanctions carve outs benefit the Venezuelan people, not just elites

Maduro’s ban on Machado is unjustified and unconstitutional, and left the US government with very little choice but to snap back the sanctions. But the truth is that, amid turmoil in the Middle East and the war in Ukraine, Venezuela policy is running up against a desire to avoid further upending delicate geostrategic balances. Washington is interested in allowing US and European energy companies to continue to operate in Venezuela, while also promoting competitive elections and ensuring that the money does not end up directly in Maduro’s pocket. As the United States offers a new path for consideration of specific licenses to energy companies interested in operating in Venezuela, it will be essential to work to ensure that dollars from oil and gas transactions are circulated among everyday Venezuelans, not kept in the hands of the elite. Any successful approach to Venezuela will have to find ways to address global energy concerns and undercut Russian and Chinese influence, while still advancing a democratic solution.

—Jason Marczak is vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

The US balances democracy promotion with a ‘complex geopolitical reality’

Yesterday’s announcement represents a compromise approach. By snapping back sanctions on Venezuela while still carving out space for Western energy companies to maintain operations, the Biden administration is trying to adjust its approach to promoting democracy and human rights in Venezuela to an increasingly complex geopolitical reality. This is a recognition that it is simply not in the US interest to sit back and watch as Russia and China deepen their footprints in the country with the largest oil reserves on the planet. At the same time, it will be crucial for the Biden administration to continue to find ways to incentivize lasting political agreements in ongoing negotiations between the opposition Unitary Platform coalition and the Maduro government. Fortunately, the US government continues to retain a degree of leverage. The White House can loosen or tighten the sanctions regime moving forward, and can float diplomatic recognition and other incentives as carrots ahead of Venezuela’s election on July 28.

—Geoff Ramsey is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

The US is seeking a Goldilocks solution to sanctions on Venezuela

The United States made a subtle and constructive diplomatic step on Venezuela sanctions on Wednesday. It has allowed General License 44 to lapse, ending the period of open access for Venezuelan crude to reach the market, including the United States, through multiple modalities. For now, Venezuela has been punished for its abrogation of the Barbados agreement.

But the US Treasury Department was clear that it welcomes, within the next forty-five days, requests for specific licenses that serve US interests. This leaves a bureaucratically cumbersome but clear path for companies to request the ability to swap Venezuelan crude for debt they are owed, for diluent or other products to relieve humanitarian distress in Venezuela, and under conditions similar to Chevron’s existing license, which minimizes the fiscal return on exports to PDVSA. 

So the path remains open to ensuring that the Maduro government is punished, but a relief valve for migration pressure inside Venezuela is available. The new policy does not discriminate against US allies by imposing harsher conditions on them than on US companies, as was the case before General License 44. In the event that there is progress on a framework for free and fair elections from Maduro in the days ahead, the potential for a further general license remains open. 

The impact on the global oil market remains to be seen. Much depends on how many private companies apply for debt or product swaps and on whether the small but significant oil projects in Venezuela apply for licenses as well. (If they do not, then we will return to the destructive “maximum pressure” policy, which had the impact of providing cheap oil for China, a product market for Iran, and humanitarian distress leading to illegal migration to the United States and elsewhere in the region.) 

Much also depends on the ability of the US Treasury to respond to those license requests swiftly. But with this one move, the United States has avoided blame for interference in the Venezuelan elections, preserved diplomatic capital for a future day, and this time managed to punish the aggressor more than the victims. Given the grim circumstances, this was the best outcome available.

—David L. Goldwyn served as special envoy for international energy under President Barack Obama and assistant secretary of energy for international relations under President Bill Clinton. He is chair of the Atlantic Council’s Energy Advisory Group and a nonresident senior fellow with the Council’s Global Energy Center.

With US sanctions waivers withdrawn, expect China to dominate Venezuela’s oil exports

Biden’s decision to withdraw the sanctions waiver for Venezuelan oil comes at a time when crude oil prices are coming off the highest prices seen this year. Just last month, Venezuela’s crude oil and petroleum product exports hit a four-year high. However, the amount of oil in question is relatively minor on the global scale and should not impact oil prices. In September 2023, the month before the Biden administration issued the waiver, Venezuela exported a total of 797,000 barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil, fuel oil, and methanol (according to TankerTrackers.com). More than 50 percent of its petroleum went to China. Other notable customers included the United States, Spain, Indonesia, and Cuba. By March 2024, Venezuela’s total exports had only increased by about one hundred thousand bpd, but it had significantly diversified its customers. Chinese exports dropped to 39 percent and notable cargoes went to India, the Netherlands, Singapore, Brazil, and Bonaire, Sint Eustatius, and Saba. (Note: Data on oil exports comes via TankerTrackers.com.)

Now that the waivers have been withdrawn, we should expect China to dominate Venezuela’s oil exports. US oil supplies should not be impacted since the total amount of Venezuelan oil and oil products imported by the United States before and after the waivers were issued was nearly identical. Venezuela will probably continue to export at the 895,000 bpd level because China will probably purchase additional cargoes that other nations stop buying now that sanctions are back in place. Overall, Venezuelan revenue may drop slightly as China will likely negotiate lower prices now that the competition for Venezuelan oil is significantly reduced. 

 —Ellen Wald is a nonresident senior fellow with the Atlantic Council Global Energy Center and the co-founder of Washington Ivy Advisors.

Sanctions should change behavior. The US chose to reinforce that principle.

When the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued General License 44 in October 2023, the Biden administration warned that Maduro would need to show concrete steps toward democratic elections for the license to be extended. Evidently, there was insufficient progress, meaning the Biden administration has effectively decided that preserving sanctions’ integrity and US credibility are as important as the outcomes for Venezuela. Given the centrality of sanctions to numerous US foreign policy objectives, I’m not surprised to see a choice that reinforces the principle that the goal of sanctions is to change behavior.

International oil companies must now decide how much they enjoyed the fleeting access to Venezuelan crude. Venezuela had stood to gain an estimated $8 billion more in oil revenue in 2024 over the previous year’s earnings. One must wonder if Maduro can replicate that figure without the United States offering sanctions relief. 

Companies that do not wind down previously authorized transactions by the end of May expose themselves to US sanctions risks, and we could see a crackdown on third parties evading the reimposition of these sanctions. Some key players to watch are Indian and Chinese oil companies. OFAC is no doubt learning from its parallel enforcement efforts with respect to the Russian oil price cap.

—Jesse Sucher is a former official at the US Department of the Treasury, where he was a deputy director of the Office of Investment Security, and a section chief and investigator for the Office of Foreign Assets Control. The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not reflect or represent those of the US government or any organization with which the author is or has been affiliated.

The post Experts react: The US just reimposed sanctions on Venezuela. What does this mean for energy markets and Venezuela’s election? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

A report by the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center in partnership with the US Department of State. This readout was informed by multi-stakeholder dialogues focused on facilitating greater, constructive exchange among multi-sectoral thought leaders and government leaders as they work to implement Summit commitments.

Executive summary

During the Ninth Summit of the Americas, member states made a historic political pledge by committing to the Action Plan on Health and Resilience, which aims to strengthen access to and investment in health services and products in the Americas. As experts and practitioners deliberated on transforming this commitment into reality, they emphasized the crucial need for consistent multisectoral coordination on both new and existing initiatives. They also stressed the importance of addressing equity issues in the implementation efforts, with special emphasis on traditionally vulnerable groups whose healthcare access was affected most by COVID-19: children with disabilities, people with autism, and the elderly. They emphasized the need to develop accountability mechanisms ensuring that national health plans transcend political shifts and provide sustained access to financing to secure their sustainability and resilience. As human mobility across the Americas continues to grow, enhancing intraregional cooperation on technology and digital infrastructure for data and information sharing will be key to addressing climate-related illnesses and other shared health challenges.

Recommendations for advancing the implementation of durable health systems in the Americas:

Report

Nov 8, 2023

Future of the Cities Summit of the Americas

By Willow Fortunoff, Diego Area

The first-ever Cities Summit of the Americas created a new platform for mayors across the hemisphere to build partnerships with civil society organizations–particularly those focused on the region and/or local governance–private sector companies, and one another.

Civil Society Energy Markets & Governance

Summit of the Americas

Amid global uncertainties and new challenges, the ninth Summit of the Americas is a renewed opportunity to bring about hemispheric cooperation and consensus to reach regional prosperity and security.

Online Event Thu, January 27, 2022 • 2:00 pm ET

Road to the Summit. Responding to the next disaster: Building health and climate resilience in the Americas

A conversation to generate strategies for creating stronger hemispheric collaboration ahead of the ninth Summit of the Americas.

Americas Caribbean Climate Change & Climate Action Latin America

Online Event Fri, June 10, 2022 • 10:00 pm ET

The joint future of the Caribbean working with Latin America

A series of discussions featuring heads of state and government following the conclusion of the Summit of the Americas.

Related experts

Staff

Isabel Chiriboga

Assistant Director

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Colombia Corruption

Staff

Martin Cassinelli

Program Assistant

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Economy & Business German

Staff

Diego Area

Deputy Director, Strategic Development

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Crisis Management Democratic Transitions

The Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center broadens understanding of regional transformations and delivers constructive, results-oriented solutions to inform how the public and private sectors can advance hemispheric prosperity.

Learn more

The post Advancing health and resilience policies in Latin America and the Caribbean appeared first on Atlantic Council.

The post Shaffer quoted in S&P Global on Iranian oil sanctions appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Despite the headwinds, Brazil’s non-aligned, cooperative, and practical approach holds out the promise of a constructive outcome for this year’s G20 meetings—especially if progress is not being measured by joint communiques (which have become irrelevant) but by agreements on concrete global initiatives. Under the overarching theme “Building a Just World and a Sustainable Planet”, Brazil has worked with countries in the Global South as well as developed countries to build consensus in launching a variety of global initiatives by the time of the G20 Summit. These initiatives reflect the key concerns of the Global South but have built on previous international agreements and include practical proposals for implementation.

Brazil’s proposed initiatives

First is the push to reform the United Nations system and the Bretton Woods institutions like the IMF, World Bank, and World Trade Organization. Reforms to the UN Security Council—where five permanent members (P5) have veto power—have been on the international agenda for a long time. While widely acknowledged in principle, no specific proposal has gained any traction. Brazil has put forward the idea that a P5 member should not be allowed to use its veto power in cases directly relating to itself—somewhat similar to the Western judiciary practice of reclusion of judges in cases of conflicts of interest. This would have meant that Russia would not have been able to use its veto power when the Security Council discussed the war in Ukraine. Such a proposal will not get the backing of the P5, especially amid the current geopolitical rivalry. But it could gather support from many countries, and not only within the Global South—keeping pressure on P5 members to respond with counter-proposals.

Calls for reform of the IMF and World Bank have been widely shared by the Global South, reiterated most recently by China demanding a redistribution of quota and voting shares to “better reflect the weight a country carries.” The G24, representing developing countries at the IMF and World Bank, has circulated a paper proposing specific reforms. These and other ideas about quota reform are scheduled be discussed by the IMF in the year ahead.

Second, another of Brazil’s linchpins for this year is launching a Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty as a tool for reaching the UN Sustainable Development Goals by 2030. That initiative leverages Brazil’s position as the second biggest food-exporting country. Specifically, the alliance will not be about initiating new funds or programs but finding ways to coordinate numerous existing funds and programs to make them more useful to recipient countries and easier to solicit contributions from developed countries. It also will compile a basket of best practices in anti-hunger and anti-poverty policies to help other countries develop their own programs. In this context, Brazil will showcase its acclaimed Bolsa Familia family welfare program, which has helped significantly reduce the country’s poverty rate and has been adapted in almost twenty other nations.

Third, Brazil will launch a Task Force for the Global Mobilization Against Climate Change to spur the G20 to help create a conducive political environment for a new and robust goal on climate finance to be agreed at this year’s COP 29 in Azerbaijan as well as for countries to present their renewed and more ambitious Nationally Determined Commitments (NDCs) to reach net zero emissions at the 2025 COP30 under Brazil’s chairmanship. Brazil will also advance its proposed Global Bioeconomy Initiative to bring together science, technology, and innovation on the use of biodiversity to promote sustainable development. This initiative will also try to expand developing countries’ access to various fragmented climate funds including the Green Climate Fund, the Climate Investment Fund, the Adaptation Fund, and the Global Environment Facility.

Fourth, leveraging the momentum of the global corporate minimum tax (effective at the beginning of this year), Brazil wants to propose a global initiative to impose a minimum tax on the super-rich which France has endorsed. This will help Brazil rally support from Global South countries as well as others to advance the proposal.

Last but not least, in September 2023 Brazil and the United States signed an MOU for a Partnership for Workers’ Rights (in particular in the gig economy). They pledged to pass necessary national legislation to achieve that goal and hope to use it as an example to get other countries to join.

The themes across these initiatives are practicality, leading by example, and a willingness to bypass time-consuming, top-down international negotiations.

While Brazil’s proposals will not all be adopted at the G20 Summit, especially in their original versions, most probably will be with some modifications. This outcome, with or without a joint communique, would represent a serious contribution by a key member of the Global South to the global reform agenda. And it comes after the achievements of India in its Presidency of last year’s G20. If South Africa keeps up this track record when assuming the G20 Presidency in 2025 (when Brazil will chair the BRICS-10 and COP30), an important step forward will be made in establishing the leadership roles of the major countries in the Global South. They are showing the ability to rally their members and to reach out to developed countries to shape global reform efforts. And if those countries, working with their partners, can sustain the implementation of the initiatives they sponsored, that would begin to make meaningful changes in the current international political and economic system. The main risk, of course, is that geopolitical rivalry will derail cooperative efforts to address pressing global problems. It remains to be seen to what extent that will happen.

Hung Tran is a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Geoeconomics Center, a former executive managing director at the Institute of International Finance and former deputy director at the International Monetary Fund.

At the intersection of economics, finance, and foreign policy, the GeoEconomics Center is a translation hub with the goal of helping shape a better global economic future.

Learn more

The post Brazil’s approach to the G20: Leading by example appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Sign up for PowerPlay, the Atlantic Council’s bimonthly newsletter keeping you up to date on all facets of the energy transition.

The United States has yet to ratify the UNCLOS due to historic opposition toward its international regulation of seabed resources in the High Seas. This lack of participation bars US companies from directly participating in what could be a significant new industry. It has already led to dominance of deep sea exploration permits by geopolitical competitors—China and Russia have together won nine permits, including in areas historically claimed by the United States. By ratifying the Law of the Sea treaty, the United States can bolster critical mineral supply security, enter deep sea markets, and enhance national security.

Governments and private industry have long worked to enable the extraction of minerals from the deep seabed  for a range of resources, including cobalt crusts, hydrothermal sulphides, and polymetallic nodules. Of these, polymetallic nodules are the most sought after—ocean processes create these billiard-ball-sized clumps of valuable metals. Ore grades in nodules significantly exceed those on land, making their extraction both cost and emissions efficient. The largest collection of nodules is located in an area called the Clarence Clipperton Zone (CCZ), which stretches the Eastern Pacific between Hawaii and Mexico. Recent technological developments, particularly in remotely operated vehicles and underwater vehicles, mean that deep sea resources are potentially economical today.

Reliable critical mineral supplies are increasingly important for the global economy and security. They are needed to meet clean energy needs, including electricity infrastructure, electric vehicles, and renewable energy. Many advanced technologies for defense applications, particularly electronics, require stable and growing supplies of these rare minerals. China dominates extraction and processing of most critical minerals, while the United States is a major importer for all minerals that deep sea mining might supply.

Governance of deep sea mining depends on location. Under UNCLOS, seabed resources within exclusive economic zones are governed by the relevant nation. Norway recently became the first country to authorize mining of such resources in their jurisdiction, but most resources are outside such zones. Resources in the remaining half of the ocean, called the High Seas, are governed by the International Seabed Authority (ISA). Although the United States played an active role in negotiating UNCLOS and considers most of it customary international law, it has not ratified the treaty due to Senate opposition to the role of the ISA. Among other reasons, some senators historically opposed the ISA’s international royalty mechanism, and expressed concerns about precedent for other domains like outer space. Without ratification, the United States cannot directly participate in the ISA’s governing process, and American companies cannot receive ISA mining permits.

These criticisms are not unfounded. The ISA has existed for decades and yet is struggling to establish a governance framework. The small nation of Nauru is forcing the issue legally, and the ISA is close to finalizing its mining permit system, without clear environmental protection. Global environmental groups have called for a moratorium on deep sea mining until scientists can conduct more research on environmental impacts.

Still, one of the primary objections (that an ISA-like royalty mechanism would be created for space exploration) to ratifying the law of the sea is no longer valid. In the last decade, the United States and many other countries have passed domestic legislation legalizing space mining without a space equivalent to ISA. This approach has been legitimized by the multilateral US-led Artemis Accords, which now has thirty-five signatories including all major space powers except China and Russia. The United States has secured a governance pathway forward for space resources that does not repeat the limitations of the ISA.

The letter calling for ratifying the Law of the Sea is the culmination of a growing bipartisan agreement around securing critical minerals in the face of an ongoing trade war with China. A group of bipartisan senators led by Senators Lisa Murkowski, Mazie Hirono, and Tim Kaine introduced a resolution explicitly calling for ratification. Congress, in both informal letters and directed reports, is pushing for studies on deep sea resources in US waters and the ability to establish domestic processing infrastructure. In late 2023, the US State Department initiated an extended continental shelf claim into the Arctic and Pacific oceans, exerting jurisdiction over seabed mining for certain areas beyond its exclusive economic zone, a practice explicitly outlined in UNCLOS. However, China and Russia have challenged this new assertion, arguing at ISA that the US cannot make the claim because it has not signed UNCLOS.

Ratifying UNCLOS would also bolster US diplomatic power. The Houthi campaign in the Red Sea is disrupting 20 percent of global maritime trade. Multiple submarine telecommunications cables in the Baltic Sea and Red Sea have been severed in the last year, threatening global internet connectivity. For more than a decade, China has been violating the principles of the LOS with their actions in the South China Sea and elsewhere. UNCLOS ratification would greatly strengthen US credibility in seeking international coalitions to push back against these challenges.

The future of deep sea mining remains uncertain. The burgeoning industry faces technical, economic, regulatory, environmental, and political challenges. The abyssal plains of the deep seabed hold unique biodiversity and are fragile, so mining activities must readily incorporate environmental best practices to limit impacts and gain social license to operate. Nevertheless, its potential benefits to meeting critical mineral supply are substantial, as are the geopolitical stakes of establishing a leadership position. The urgency of securing critical mineral supply means the time is right for the United States to reconsider its formal participation in UNCLOS.

Alex Gilbert is a PhD student in space resources and a fellow at the Payne Institute for Public Policy at the Colorado School of Mines.

Morgan Bazilian is the director of the Payne Institute for Public Policy at the Colorado School of Mines.

EnergySource

EnergySource is the Global Energy Center’s (GEC) online publication providing commentary and analysis on developments in the energy and climate sector from a wide-array of thought leaders, politicians, and experts.

Read more

Related content

EnergySource Aug 16, 2023

One year after the IRA, the hard work to build resilient mineral supply chains is only beginning

By Reed Blakemore, Paddy Ryan

Twelve months since the IRA’s bet big on alternative mineral supply chains, the clean energy commodities market is changing. Washington’s strategy must change along with it.

Energy & Environment Energy Transitions

EnergySource Jul 11, 2023

How cities can drive the energy transition in the Western Hemisphere

By Maia Sparkman, Willow Fortunoff

Expanding access to critical minerals and increasing manufacturing capacity is at the top of the Biden administration’s decarbonization agenda. Mayors, who have shown their ability to deliver on domestic investment projects, have begun exploring opportunities for international collaboration.

Americas Climate Change & Climate Action

Testimony Sep 15, 2023

Planning around strategic supply chains will require more than just ‘listing’ of critical minerals

By Reed Blakemore

We need to ensure that our minerals policy does not become overly clerkish, prescribing problems rather than solving them. Capturing the supply/demand dynamism between each critical mineral will illuminate the pathways to build a cohesive minerals strategy.

Energy & Environment Energy Transitions

Learn more about the Global Energy Center

The Global Energy Center develops and promotes pragmatic and nonpartisan policy solutions designed to advance global energy security, enhance economic opportunity, and accelerate pathways to net-zero emissions.

learn more

The post US ratification of the ocean treaty will unlock deep sea mining appeared first on Atlantic Council.

A major obstacle is that the Caribbean’s development model does not yet utilize the full extent of its human capital. Too often, women are not part of the Caribbean’s current development equation, with gender disparities limiting economic opportunities for women and thus holding back economic growth across the region. As Caribbean countries navigate the global financial landscape, governments should look at how increasing economic empowerment opportunities for women can be a new development tool for the region.

Caribbean countries face a host of economic challenges. The region houses small market and import-dependent economies that rely on tourism to drive economic growth. Strong tropical storms, global inflation, and supply chain constraints all have adverse effects on Caribbean economies. Often, as countries import goods and services at high prices, the cost is passed down to the consumer. At the same time, the region has a relatively small population compared to its neighbors in Latin America. This means that capacity is a barrier to economic growth. Simply put, there are not enough people in the region, and by extension, not enough technical expertise and businesses to carry out needed functions that stimulate growth and drive innovation.

But the Caribbean’s small populations are even smaller given that fewer women than men are in the workforce. In many Caribbean countries, female participation in the labor force is around 60 percent, and in some nations it’s closer to 40 percent, according to the World Bank. Compare this with male labor force participation, which often approaches or surpasses 80 percent. The gap is further amplified when taking into account the region’s human capital constraints. While the gap for Caribbean countries is smaller than their neighbors in Latin America, the estimated 20 percent difference has an outsized effect on the region’s economic potential. Tens of thousands of new workers in countries with populations below a million can significantly boost economic prospects. Further, since the Caribbean experiences above-average brain drain and many countries such as Guyana, Jamaica, and Barbados have trouble filling skills gaps, it begs the question: What would development in the Caribbean look like if every bit of the population’s potential was realized?

For more women to participate in the workforce, the root causes need to be addressed. First, despite high educational attainment for women—relative to men—this does not always translate into job opportunities. A new Atlantic Council report looks at educational attainment, measured as a percentage of adults who have completed at least primary education. In Belize, Guyana, Jamaica, and Saint Lucia, educational attainment ranges from just under 80 percent to about 86 percent for women, whereas for men it hovers between 74 percent and 81 percent. Yet workforce participation for women remains lower than for men. Second, when women do enter the workforce, there is a significant wage gap. In Jamaica, women earn about 83 percent of their male counterparts and 88 percent in Barbados. Finally, women are often expected to be home and child caretakers—a responsibility that is unpaid but places an inequitable burden on them relative to men. Unpaid work is a significant barrier to entry for women in the workforce, as offloading these responsibilities comes with expenses that can be covered only by women of a higher income bracket.

Fortunately, Caribbean countries have partners—such as outside nations and international institutions—that can support work on gender equality and economic empowerment. To be sure, Caribbean countries have made progress in gender equality, such as facilitating increases in political participation for women. But the structural barriers facing gender equity are partially a result of the region’s economic makeup, and they require more than just national attention to overcome.

Here, Caribbean countries and their partners should consider undertaking two policy initiatives. First, the focus should be on making it easier for women to enter the workforce while also making the workforce more equitable for them. Women aiming to start new businesses need access to finance mechanisms that are tailored to the realities they face. Many women in the Caribbean do not have a credit history, making it difficult for them to take out loans. If they can access loans, they are usually at high interest rates, meaning that businesses that take longer to return profits can put women-owned enterprises in severe debt. To address these issues, development banks should work with governments to create grant-to-loan mechanisms for women-owned start-ups. Metrics and monitoring mechanisms can be put in place where businesses that return medium-to-high profits over a certain period have their grants turned to low-interest loans. But Caribbean governments cannot afford these mechanisms if they themselves cannot access financing, meaning that a pool of resources from, for example, the World Bank and the Canadian government should help subsidize these costs. 

Second, at a regional level, Caribbean governments should work with partners to create an incubator program for women in the workforce. Success in business, particularly in the private sector, takes more than capital. Time and professional networks are important but are hard to come by for women taking most of the household and childcare burden. An incubator program can help women be part of an active peer-to-peer network that understands their realities. Such a program can help provide access to resources and institutions that ease many of the challenges women face. Many countries have existing women’s chambers or networks, but a region-wide effort would allow for members to share best practices and potentially, resources.

With Caribbean countries facing economic headwinds, governments need the active participation of all their citizens. Women and girls should be the first and immediate resource utilized. But doing so requires ensuring that their participation does not come at an adverse socioeconomic cost. Providing them the same opportunities as men and amplifying their empowerment can be the key to a new development tool in the Caribbean.

Wazim Mowla is the associate director & fellow of the Caribbean Initiative at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

This article is part of the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center’s partnership with the UN Women Multi-Country Office–Caribbean.

The post Gender equality can drive economic development in the Caribbean appeared first on Atlantic Council.

One such project is our effort to establish an intergovernmental Syria Victims Fund. Over the past year, we and our Syrian partners have conducted dozens of consultations with Syrian civil society to develop a framework for the fund, which were used to draft a white paper on the concept for decision makers in country capitals and within international organizations. In February, we were thrilled to see the framework implemented into the European Parliament’s report recommending that the European Council, European Commission, and European External Action Service work to establish such a fund.

We have also seen promising progress in the ongoing campaign to codify the crime of gender apartheid in the United Nations (UN) Sixth Committee’s draft crimes against humanity treaty. On March 8, International Women’s Day, we cohosted a high-level panel event in New York City about gender apartheid in Afghanistan and the momentum behind efforts to codify the crime under international law. The event featured a remarkable line-up of experts, including Nobel Peace Laureate Malala Yousafzai and UN Working Group on Discrimination against Women and Girls Chair Dorothy Estrada-Tanck. In the week leading up to the event, I joined a delegation of our team members in traveling to several country capitals in Latin America to gather support for the campaign. You can read more details about the trip and other campaign efforts below.

Additionally, the Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran released a report to the UN Human Rights Council which found that security forces committed crimes against humanity during the Woman, Life, Freedom protests. To support future accountability for these violations, we partnered with Mnemonic to launch the Iranian Archive, which has preserved open-source digital information identifying these violations. 

As always, we at the SLP are incredibly grateful for your continued support. If you have any ideas about what we should be working on or thoughts on our initiatives, we welcome your feedback.

Kind regards,

Staff

Gissou Nia

Director, Strategic Litigation Project

Rafik Hariri Center & Middle East programs

Civil Society Corruption

Send Feedback Support our work

Our team, in partnership with Syrian civil society and SLP Nonresident Senior Fellow Joumana Seif, has been working to establish an intergovernmental Syria Victims Fund. Over the past year, the SLP team and its Syrian partners have conducted dozens of consultations with civil society to develop a framework for a victims fund and met with representatives of governments and international organizations to brief them on the concept.

The proposed framework for the Syria Victims Fund would rely on significant monetary judgments and fines that states are collecting linked to violations in Syria—fines, penalties, and forfeitures for sanctions violations and international crimes committed in Syria. Rather than retaining those funds and essentially profiting off violations in Syria, States should deposit Syria-linked funds into a central location and direct the funds to better support victims of international law violations in Syria.

In February, the European Parliament adopted a report recommending that the European Council, European Commission, and European External Action Service work to establish such a fund for victims of international law violations in Syria, financed by “monetary judgments, sanctions, fines and penalties, forfeiture orders . . . and other revenue.” The report further recommends that European Union (EU) member states then carefully design a fund “in full cooperation with the families of the victims.”

Learn more about the Syria Victims Fund

Just Security has launched a blog series discussing the concept of a Syria victims fund. Read our experts’ contributions:

Joumana Seif: “It’s Time to Establish a Syria Victims Fund”

Elise Baker and Nushin Sarkarati: “No State Should Profit from Violations in Syria. Instead, Direct Monetary Recovery to Victims.”

Celeste Kmiotek and Sameer Saboungi: “The US Recovered Over $600 Million in ISIS-Linked Funds–They Should Go to Syrian and Iraqi Victims”

Ambassador Stephen J. Rapp and Alyssa Yamamoto: “Applying Ukraine Precedent, DOJ Should Use Funds Forfeited from Lawbreakers in Syria to Assist Victims”

International Women’s Day panel event

On March 8, the SLP, in partnership with the International Peace Institute and the Malala Fund, hosted a high-level panel event in New York City about the urgent need for legal recognition of gender apartheid in Afghanistan. The discussion addressed the deteriorating rights of girls, women, and individuals of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities in Afghanistan and the momentum around efforts to codify the crime of gender apartheid under international law, including in the potential UN crimes against humanity treaty. This event was cosponsored by the Global Justice Center, Rawadari, Georgetown Institute of Women, Peace & Security, and the Permanent Missions of Malta and Mexico.

The panel featured Nobel Peace Laureate Malala Yousafzai, Afghan activist and expert Nayera Kohistani, New York Law School Professor and anti-apartheid jurist Penelope Andrews, and UN Working Group on Discrimination against Women and Girls Chair Dorothy Estrada-Tanck, and was moderated by CNN International Correspondent Jomana Karadsheh.

If you were unable to join us live, you can watch the event playback here. 

Briefings in New York City and Washington, DC

In January, the SLP hosted a series of briefings on the gender apartheid codification effort in New York City and Washington, DC, during which the SLP’s Senior Legal and Policy Advisor Alyssa Yamamoto and Strategic Legal Advisor for Gender Justice Akila Radhakrishnan were joined by a panel of experts including the SLP Senior Legal Advisor Sareta Ashraph, Penelope Andrews, Christina Hioureas, SLP Gender and Policy Advisor Metra Mehran, and Paloma van Groll. In Washington, the group met with representatives of several think tanks, US government bodies, and EU embassies. In New York, the delegation hosted closed regional briefings for Latin American and Caribbean countries and EU and other Western countries.

Advocacy in Latin America

Earlier this month, Gissou Nia, along with Akila Radhakrishnan and SLP Nonresident Senior Fellow Nizar El Fakih, traveled to country capitals in Latin America to discuss human rights, gender justice, and other issues impacting Iran and Afghanistan. The group met with high-level representatives of the governments of Chile, Argentina, Brazil, and Colombia to urge their support for both codifying gender apartheid in the UN Sixth Committee’s draft crimes against humanity treaty and extending the mandate of the UN Fact-Finding Mission on Iran by voting in favor of an upcoming UN Human Rights Council resolution.

Chile’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs produced a press release about the group’s meeting with Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs Gloria de la Fuente, which you can read here.

Following the release of the UN Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran’s report to the UN Human Rights Council finding crimes against humanity, including for gender persecution committed over the course of the protests following the death of Mahsa Jina Amini, the SLP and Mnemonic in partnership with a coalition of international organizations announced the launch of the Iranian Archive. The archive preserved over one million vulnerable digital artifacts recording serious human rights violations committed by the Islamic Republic of Iran against Woman, Life, Freedom movement protestors.

The Iranian Archive is intended to support future investigations and accountability proceedings. The SLP and Mnemonic are partnered with The Promise Institute for Human Rights at UCLA Law, UC Berkeley’s Human Rights Center, Amnesty International‘s Digital Verification Corps, the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center, and the Azadi Archive. 

In January, SLP Nonresident Senior Fellow and Uyghur human rights lawyer Rayhan Asat traveled to Geneva to attend the interactive dialogue for China’s 2024 Universal Periodic Review (UPR), a process through which the UN Human Rights Council assesses the human rights records of all UN member states according to a rotating schedule of cycles.

Since the UPR takes place only every five years, its interactive dialogue presents a significant opportunity for member states to make specific and measurable recommendations to China in light of the ongoing repression of the Uyghur community and the Chinese government’s disregard for previous critiques of its human rights record. In July, Asat submitted a comprehensive report to the UPR Working Group on the human rights situation in Xinjiang, followed by a New Atlanticist piece about the contents of the report and the need for member states and US officials to hold China accountable for its abuses.

While in Geneva, Asat met with representatives of twenty-two member states to encourage their participation in the interactive dialogue. In the meetings, she presented them with a briefing paper outlining China’s violations against the Uyghurs, the findings of relevant UN human rights bodies, and suggested recommendations to be made to China during its review. Ultimately, more than twenty member states took a strong stance against China’s human rights record during the session.

In February, the SLP published its latest report, “The far reach of justice: Holding the Islamic Republic of Iran Accountable in European courts.” The report explores the options available to hold the Islamic Republic of Iran accountable through the national judicial systems of seven European states by using their universal jurisdiction frameworks.

Report

Dec 22, 2023

How to hold the Islamic Republic of Iran accountable in European courts

By Gissou Nia, Celeste Kmiotek, Lisandra Novo, Alyssa T. Yamamoto

While there are no viable domestic routes toward accountability within Iran, national judicial systems in other states present an alternative path to justice. This report examines prospects for initiating prosecutions against IRI perpetrators in European jurisdictions.

Human Rights International Norms

Throughout Europe, states have adopted universal jurisdiction provisions, which allow them to prosecute acts that constitute core international crimes—genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity—even if the crime was committed in a different state by and against foreign nationals. The countries covered in the report—Belgium, England and Wales, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Switzerland—were selected due to several factors, including the strength of their universal jurisdiction frameworks and frequency of use; their robust caselaw and policies for prosecuting atrocity crimes committed extraterritorially; the size of Iranian expatriate communities in these countries, especially those fleeing persecution and violence; and the possibility of travel by Iranian officials to these jurisdictions.

This report details what each country’s universal jurisdiction provisions entail, how proceedings are initiated, and what victims’ rights are protected. It also gives an overview of each state’s relevant jurisprudence to date, analyzing the legal, practical, and political viability of future cases involving Islamic Republic of Iran violations, including in light of the country’s diplomatic relationship with Iran. Finally, it provides regional and country-specific recommendations to facilitate more cases against Islamic Republic of Iran perpetrators and to strengthen universal jurisdiction frameworks more broadly.

On February 14, the SLP hosted a hybrid event about the crucial role women and their testimonies play in pursuit of justice and accountability in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). The panel featured Dalal Mawad, award-winning Lebanese journalist and author of All She Lost: The Explosion in Lebanon, the Collapse of a Nation and the Women Who Survive; Mai El-Sadany, executive director of the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy; and Haydee Dijkstal, an international human rights lawyer and SLP nonresident senior fellow.

The discussion was moderated by Patricia Karam, a nonresident senior fellow at Arab Center Washington DC, and touched on a variety of issues, including possible responses to gender-based and sexual violence, the role of independent media in accountability efforts, and legal mechanisms protecting the rights of women and girls.

Public Event Wed, February 14, 2024 • 1:00 pm ET

Justice and accountability in the MENA region: The importance of women’s stories

A panel discussion about the crucial role women and their testimonies play in the pursuit of justice in accountability in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA).

Human Rights International Norms

Watch the Event Read the Recap

Fellow

Metra Mehran

Gender and Policy Advisor

Rafik Hariri Center & Middle East programs

Afghanistan Civil Society

Fellow

Azadah Raz Mohammad

Legal Advisor

Rafik Hariri Center & Middle East programs

Afghanistan Civil Society

Fellow

Mark Klamberg

Nonresident Senior Fellow

Rafik Hariri Center & Middle East programs

English European Union

Fellow

Ivan Horodyskyy

Nonresident Senior Fellow

Rafik Hariri Center & Middle East programs

Eastern Europe English

Subscribe to our newsletter for quarterly updates on the SLP’s work on prevention and accountability efforts for atrocity crimes, human rights violations, and terrorism and corruption offenses around the world.

The post Strategic Litigation Quarterly Newsletter: It’s time for a Syria Victims Fund. appeared first on Atlantic Council.

The post Goldwyn quoted in S&P Global Commodity Insights on Venezuelan sanctions appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Watch the event

Public Event Tue, March 19, 2024 • 10:00 am ET

General Laura Richardson on security in the Western Hemisphere

AN #ACFRONTPAGE EVENT—Gen. Laura J. Richardson, Commander of US Southern Command, discusses her vision for US security partnership with Latin America and the Caribbean.

Americas Caribbean Latin America Security & Defense

The United States isn’t ruling out deploying military forces to Haiti in response to the country’s crisis—as long as such a measure is part of an “international solution” that incorporates Haiti’s perspective, said General Laura Richardson, commander of US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM).

“We wouldn’t discount that at any time,” she said at an Atlantic Council Front Page event on Tuesday hosted by the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center and the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security. “We are prepared if called upon by our State Department and by our Department of Defense.”

But while the United States isn’t currently planning to put boots on the ground, Richardson clarified, SOUTHCOM has a wide range of contingency plans that it is responsible for maintaining. For example, to prepare for potential mass migration from Haiti, Richardson said that SOUTHCOM readied its naval station in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to process a possible influx of migrants.

“We want to be able to do exactly what’s right and humane and be able to take care of populations that are trying to escape,” she said.

Richardson said that it is important to ready these plans as the situation continues to evolve in Haiti. Meanwhile, she said that the US State Department is working with the fifteen-member Caribbean Community and Haitian leaders to get a transitional presidential council in place—which will pave the way not only for the selection of an interim prime minister but also for the deployment of a Kenya-led international force to restore security.

Below are more highlights from Richardson’s conversation with Politico National Security Reporter Alexander Ward, which touched upon challenges seen in other countries around SOUTHCOM’s area of responsibility and China’s influence in the region.

Causes for concern

• Last month, satellite images showed the Venezuelan military bolstering its presence near the border with Guyana. Richardson reiterated the United States’ support to Guyana, saying that the United States is continuing “all of our activities, our operations, activities, and investments,” with the country and that it is important for its allies to come together and “to show strong support for Guyana in this situation.”
• With Ecuador now in a state of emergency after an escalation of violence between the government and criminal groups, Richardson said the United States has “doubled down” on its operations and activities there and has delivered emergency security equipment—it recently donated a C-130 military transport aircraft that is on the way. “As they wrestle with those hard challenges and security and instability, we have to continue with our economic investment,” she said.

China stepping in

• Richardson touched upon China’s rising influence in the Panama Canal, a Chinese military-run space station in Argentina, and reports last year that China is enhancing its spy capabilities in Cuba. “What’s happening in Latin America and the Caribbean is not new,” Richardson said. “It’s not new to the globe, and it’s not new to [China’s] . . . vision and strategy.”
• She argued that China has noticed the vast resources available in Latin America and the Caribbean—and also the relative vulnerability of the countries there, which are “still digging out” from the economic impact of COVID-19 and the “insecurity and instability” created by organized crime. “There’s not one country that’s being spared from all the challenges from the transnational criminal organizations.”
• Richardson noted that when China makes agreements with countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, such as within the Belt and Road Initiative, they’re often “tit for tat” and accompanied by demands such as not recognizing Taiwan. “There’s always a hook,” she said.

The counteroffer from “Team USA”

• With China increasing its presence in the region, Richardson said that the United States is sharing information with partner countries about China’s aims and activities so that they, in turn, can make their own decisions about working with Beijing.
• “We don’t do things for strings attached; we don’t have the fine print on things,” Richardson said. “We do it because we’re a like-minded democracy . . . and we would like this region to remain free, secure, and prosperous.”
• Richardson also called upon US companies to offer competitive alternatives to China’s critical-infrastructure projects in the region. “We’re not competing as much as we should,” she said. “Strategic competition is alive and well in the hemisphere. But if you’re going to compete, you’ve got to be on the ground. You’ve got to have your jersey on. You’ve got to have your number. You’ve got to be out there competing.”
• The general admitted that the United States “could have done a little bit better” in paying attention to the region in recent years. “Certainly, when there are crises that require our attention in other parts of the world, that’s where the focus is,” she said. But “we can’t just focus on one or two places. We have got to continue to focus on our partners in the hemisphere that we’re part of.”

Katherine Walla is an associate director on the editorial team at the Atlantic Council. 

Watch the full event

The post Gen. Laura Richardson on what an international response to Haiti might look like appeared first on Atlantic Council.

One challenge has remained constant for Haiti, however: It fades from attention just as quickly as it makes headlines. That must be stopped. The historical lack of commitment to putting Haiti on a different political and economic path—combined with the country being battered by natural disasters, in addition to the man-made ones—has meant that carving out a different trajectory for Haitians has eluded both local and international leaders. What is needed is a long-term approach, in which Caribbean leaders are in the driver’s seat along with their Haitian counterparts, while the United States and Canada help to offset the costs given the grave implications of inaction.

A window of opportunity

When Haitian Prime Minister Ariel Henry announced on March 12 that he will resign after a transitional presidential council is created, it opened a window of opportunity for a country battling multiple crises at once. Since Henry assumed power in 2021, following his predecessor’s assassination, Haiti has been taken hostage by fervent gang violence and political instability, plunging the country into a humanitarian crisis. With not enough food or medicine entering the country, Haitians suffer from hunger and disease.

Haiti’s problems are also no longer confined to its own borders. Haitians are emigrating in droves, and gangs that now control the island traffic firearms and drugs in the wider region. With the likelihood of further instability, Haiti’s neighbors must prepare for the repercussions of a failed state, where lawlessness will only invite other transnational criminal organizations to take advantage of the moment.

But amid this bleak outlook, the negotiated transitional presidential council gives a glimmer of hope that Haiti might see some form of stability in the coming years. Bringing the council and other potential solutions to fruition will require a sustained and collective effort from all parties across the hemisphere, including Haitian stakeholders.

The role of Caribbean countries

Caribbean leadership will be essential for coordinating regional and international support to Haiti. Central to this coordination should be the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), a bloc of fourteen independent member states that already has offered an open, two-way channel of communication between regional countries and Haitian stakeholders.

For example, just prior to his trip to Nairobi earlier this month to discuss the Kenyan-led Multinational Security Support mission, the Haitian prime minister was in Guyana for CARICOM’s annual heads of government meeting. It was also the current chair of CARICOM, Guyanese President Irfaan Ali, who led a leaders’ delegation to Jamaica that, alongside US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, announced the plan for a transitional presidential council. These meetings have held a spotlight on Haiti’s crisis, keeping it top of mind for both the region and foreign officials who engage with the Caribbean. In addition, Jamaica, Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, and several other Caribbean countries have been essential in global coordination efforts on Haiti over the past few years.

But for Caribbean countries to continue leading on Haiti in a sustained way, they need resources. Engaging in frequent diplomatic discussions and devoting security personnel are cost-intensive efforts. The region has limited local capacity within its foreign ministries, and tight budgets make frequent travel difficult. Leaders also are grappling with a variety of pressing issues, including climate change, food and energy insecurity, and rising inflation.

The role of the United States and Canada

The United States and Canada must work in tandem with the Caribbean to provide the resources needed to play an active and continued role in Haiti’s future. This includes direct aid to Haiti to help restore law and order and provide the necessary humanitarian resources the country so desperately needs. Toward that end, the United States Agency for International Development on March 15 announced twenty-five million dollars in humanitarian aid, on top of the thirty-three million dollars announced by Blinken four days earlier, further solidifying the United States’ role as Haiti’s largest humanitarian donor. On February 22, Canada announced nearly ninety-one million dollars to support Haiti.

In addition to direct support, the United States and Canada should also help to offset the cost to Caribbean countries of remaining engaged on Haiti, which is essential for the country’s future.

First, traveling to Haiti or to other international convenings is costly, particularly when unplanned. Air connectivity between Caribbean islands is limited, and most governments do not have access to private aircraft. The United States or Canada can find ways to offset these costs, making it easier for leaders to attend convenings. Short-notice meetings, such as the ministerial meeting on the margins of the Group of Twenty (G20) foreign ministers’ meeting in late February or the Jamaica meeting this past week, should be led by CARICOM governments. But the cost of participation will constrain already tight budgets.

Second, deployment of security personnel is costly, particularly over a sustained period. The United States and Canada should consider alleviating the burden of these costs, which would allow leaders to justify to their national budgets and domestic populations why they should send or increase the police and defense personnel deployed to Haiti. Countries such as Jamaica and The Bahamas have committed personnel, but both countries have their own domestic security challenges to consider, meaning sending officers abroad is unlikely to win much support at home over a longer period. 

Finally, attention on Haiti cannot distract from the numerous challenges facing the rest of the region. Over the past few years, the United States and Canada have both launched new flagship Caribbean policies, and high-level diplomatic engagements have started to move the needle on important issues, including climate change and energy security. If Caribbean nations are expected to lead, then they need assurances that their priorities will not be forgotten.

What’s clear is that there is no quick fix to Haiti’s crisis, nor is there one solution over a longer period that will stabilize the country. Haiti’s challenges are complex and deeply rooted in its postcolonial history. Any cadre of solutions will only come after frequent and consistent diplomacy and action to negotiate a way forward for Haiti. All of this requires the resources to stand up the needed attention and engagement Haiti deserves.

Jason Marczak is vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center. 

Wazim Mowla is associate director and fellow of the Caribbean Initiative at the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

The post Addressing Haiti’s turmoil starts with its Caribbean neighbors—and US and Canadian support appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Online Event Thu, March 7, 2024 • 2:00 pm ET

Courage to seek justice: Addressing the unjust political imprisonment of women

The Atlantic Council and the Department of State’s Secretary’s Office of Global Women’s Issues co-host a discussion with the 2024 International Women of Courage award recipients.

Belarus Eastern Europe Europe & Eurasia Political Reform

The unjust imprisonment of women affects far more than those detained and their families, warned Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the US representative to the United Nations.

“It’s devastating for entire communities,” she explained. “It hollows out civil society. It creates a culture: a culture of fear. It squashes hopes for a democratic future.”

Thomas-Greenfield spoke at an event last week cohosted by the Atlantic Council and the US Secretary of State’s Office of Global Women’s Issues designed to amplify the voices of women who have survived unjust imprisonment or other human-rights abuses.

“We all must do more to familiarize ourselves with the stories and with the facts regarding political prisoners, including women political prisoners,” said Geeta Rao Gupta, ambassador-at-large at the Office of Global Women’s Issues. “We must help give voice to those who remain unjustly behind bars and those whose voices are stifled.”

The event, moderated by Atlantic Council Executive Vice President Jenna Ben-Yehuda, gathered three recipients of the US State Department’s 2024 International Women of Courage Award to share their experiences and highlight the need for international support. Below are their stories.

Martha Beatriz Roque Cabello: Why it is now “very difficult” for prisoners

• Roque, a Cuban political dissident and human-rights activist, talked about her experiences working with political prisoners and their families. “I cannot even distinguish which is worse, being imprisoned or being a relative of a prisoner,” she said.
• Speaking from Cuba—having been blocked from traveling to the United States by the Cuban government since 2018—she added that the economic crisis there, which has led to severe shortages of food and other supplies, has made the situation “very difficult” for prisoners.
• Roque herself has spent decades protesting against the Cuban government and was imprisoned twice. She now provides support to political prisoners. “I believe that being with them, even in thought, is something that will help them,” she said.

Fariba Balouch: “Pay attention” to minority groups and hold Iran’s regime responsible

• Balouch, a London-based Iranian human-rights activist, recounted how—when she lived in Iran’s Sistan and Baluchestan Province—she had escaped an abusive marriage. She said she was “afraid to speak up about that” at the time, but then realized that, as women, “we have to raise that awareness.”
• Balouch said that she felt it was her “duty” and “responsibility” to speak up for women in Sistan and Baluchestan Province; she also said that she had to make a “difficult choice” between being a mother and lifting the voices of marginalized people around her. “I decided to go with the people’s voice,” she said.
• Balouch explained that in Iran, being a woman political prisoner comes with a lot of harassment. But “if you’re representing an ethnic minority,” she said, “that even doubles your problems and challenges.” As for being an activist: “That would make it even triple.”
• She added that even once Baloch women leave Iran, they—and their families—continue to face similar threats and other pressures. She explained that she has received threats and that her son and her brother are currently imprisoned in Iran—her son was detained after having traveled to visit Balouch in the United Kingdom.
• Balouch called upon the international community to support women activists and their families and to “pay attention” to minority communities “so the Islamic Republic of Iran knows that it has a responsibility” to ensure that no Baloch is killed in prison.

Volha Harbunova: This is a “global crisis”

• Volha Harbunova, a Belarusian human rights defender, recounted how she fled Belarus after being released from prison and was later appointed the representative for social issues in the Belarusian United Transitional Cabinet, the government-in-exile led by Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya. She called upon Belarusians who have fled and live outside of the country to keep up communication with people inside the country who face repression. The Lukashenka regime “doesn’t want [us] to have that communication,” she said. “They want to isolate us. They want to stop that solidarity.”
• Harbunova argued that violence against women is a “global crisis,” which she said has recently been made clear by the rape and killing of a Belarusian refugee in Poland.
• Harbunova recalled having faced psychological torture and violence after being imprisoned by the Lukashenka regime. She also noted that political prisoners are restricted from accessing medical care, food, and hygienic products—and that they are not allowed to communicate with family or their attorneys. LGBTQI+ people in prison, she added, often face more severe sexual violence. “The issue of political prisoners is a humanitarian issue; it’s a matter of life and death,” Harbunova said. “We really need help in securing the release of those prisoners.”

Katherine Walla is an associate director on the editorial team at the Atlantic Council. 

Watch the full event

The post Three activists offer a window into life behind bars for unjustly imprisoned women around the world appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On March 5, after weeks of speculation over when the presidential election might be scheduled, Venezuela’s National Electoral Council (CNE) announced that the vote will be held on July 28. Both the timing of the announcement and the election date were no coincidence. March 5 was the anniversary of the death of Hugo Chávez, strongman Nicolás Maduro’s predecessor and founder of the ruling United Socialist Party, and July 28 is his birthday. Venezuela’s Unitary Platform opposition coalition now faces the difficult task of coming up with a united strategy ahead of the election in which the deeply unpopular Maduro will have an unfair systematic advantage–and the symbolism of the announcement shows Maduro has no shame in letting that be known.

The clock is ticking. According to the electoral timetable announced by the CNE, the opposition has until March 25 to register a candidate in the election. While it can name a placeholder to buy time and reserve a slot on the ballot, the name of the candidate that will appear on voting day must be finalized by April 20.

María Corina Machado, the winner of the opposition primary held five months ago, remains banned from participating in the presidential election. While the Barbados Agreement that the government signed in October 2023 with the opposition announced the creation of a “procedure” to review bans on interested candidates, the Maduro-friendly Supreme Court has doubled down on Machado’s ban. The CNE’s own website makes clear that she is banned from participating in any elections until 2036.

In the face of this reality, there are competing views on the way forward for Venezuela’s opposition. Machado has publicly rejected the government’s ban and insisted at campaign events around the country that she will run anyway. However, reports began surfacing since late in 2023 that she is more flexible in private and would be open to naming a successor if she ultimately could not run. Her public position remains firm, however, and at an Atlantic Council event on February 26, she acknowledged that she is holding her cards close to her vest. Although she said that she remains committed to “the electoral route,” she refused outright to reject the possibility of calling for abstention. Yet polls suggest an electoral boycott, such as the ones the mainstream opposition organized in the 2018 presidential election, would be deeply unpopular. According to a recent survey by the independent Caracas-based pollster Datincorp, 70 percent of Venezuelans say that if her ban remains in place, then Machado should name an alternate candidate to run instead.

In addition to being unpopular, calling for an electoral boycott would likely exacerbate divisions within the Unitary Platform that have long simmered under the surface. While some elements of the opposition coalition have rejected any talk of a substitute candidate, others have hinted that they will move to a “plan B” with or without Machado. The opposition governor of Barinas state, who himself won a deeply unfair election after the previous opposition winner had been banned from taking office, said in January: “Our position has always been clear, we are not going to stop for her [Machado], we will choose among all of us a new candidate, to be the president of all Venezuelans.” There have been reports that some members of the coalition are calling for Zulia state governor Manuel Rosales to be named as the alternate candidate.

The apparent willingness of some coalition members to field a candidate essentially guarantees that someone from the Unitary Platform will run for president in the July 28 election. The only question is whether it will be a united front. However reticent Machado may be to accept the idea of a substitute, it is almost certain that she would not endorse one who attempts to go around her back. And given her overwhelming popularity—Datincorp suggests she would beat Maduro by 40 points in a head-to-head match—Machado’s backing is essential for any replacement to stand a chance on July 28. With the deck stacked against it, the opposition needs every vote.

That leaves only one viable choice: Find a consensus candidate that has the full backing of the entire opposition spectrum, starting with Machado herself. This is easier said than done, but there is a way to ensure that a “plan B” scenario respects the outcome of the opposition primary and harnesses Machado’s popularity at the same time. In Venezuela, like in the United States, the vice president is next in the line of succession. Unlike the United States, however, candidates for vice president do not appear on the ballot. The position is appointed directly by the chief executive. Machado could, in theory, support a placeholder candidate—or a series of placeholder candidates, in the case that they face bans as well—with the understanding that this trusted individual would name her as vice president upon winning, and then resign from office. This would trigger new elections, or it would allow the vice president to assume the role of head of state if the resignation occurred in the last two years of the term.

This strategy would allow Machado to cement her image as not just a candidate, but as the leader of a broad and diverse majority of Venezuelans working to restore the country’s democratic institutions. Working alongside a renewed Unitary Platform coalition, she could energize and mobilize Venezuelans across the country, creating the best opportunity that the opposition has had in years to overcome an electoral system designed to work against them. The Datincorp poll shows that just 15 percent of Venezuelans would vote for Maduro, in line with other surveys which find that an extraordinary 85 percent of the country believes a change in government is necessary.

Even then, victory is far from guaranteed. At least four representatives of Machado’s campaign have been detained across the country in recent weeks, and rights groups say there are more than 250 political prisoners in Venezuela. This includes Rocío San Miguel, a well-known civil society activist whose arbitrary detention has sparked international condemnation. The government closed twelve radio stations across seven states last year, and the independent press faces an environment of constant censorship and repression. While the CNE has said it will invite credible electoral observers such as the European Union and the Carter Center to oversee the vote, the terms of these observation missions would have to be carefully negotiated. At this stage, it is entirely clear that Venezuela’s authoritarian reality will present the opposition with an uphill battle.

The path forward is narrow, and the opportunity is slim. But if the opposition can get behind a single candidate who can run in the election, the Venezuelan peoples’ overwhelming consensus against Maduro could be enough to—finally—bring democratic change.

Geoff Ramsey is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

The post Venezuela’s opposition is challenging Maduro in the next election. The only question is how. appeared first on Atlantic Council.

Summary

The Caribbean is one of the most vulnerable regions globally. It harbors economies that are open-faced and import-dependent, making it susceptible to the ravages of climate change, fluctuating commodity prices, and inflationary pressures. While governments and financial institutions grapple with these perpetual stresses, it is the Caribbean citizens, particularly women and girls, who bear the heaviest burden.

Nestled in this uniquely vulnerable region, women and girls face a multitude of challenges, demanding comprehensive support from both governments and financial institutions to enhance their resilience and opportunities throughout society. Their integration across various sectors, including government, business, and local organizations, emphasizes that addressing gender challenges cannot occur in isolation.

The global issues looming over the Caribbean magnify the specific hurdles confronting women and girls. From gender-based violence (GBV) and economic barriers to limited political influence and the disproportionate impacts of climate change, the challenges intertwine, creating a crisis of gender inequality and inequity across the Caribbean.

This publication compiles findings from a yearlong consultative effort, revealing that the challenges faced by women and girls are rooted in societal perceptions of their roles and restricted access to tools and resources. To overcome these barriers, a fundamental reshaping of social norms, alongside political and financial institutions, is imperative. Moreover, integrating women and girls into the development model aligns with the region’s broader ambitions of achieving UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), unlocking untapped human capital and fostering long-term prosperity.

In collaboration with the UN Women Caribbean Multi-Country Office, the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center and its Caribbean Initiative embarked on a year-long partnership. This initiative aimed to address GBV, economic empowerment challenges, limited political influence, and the disproportionate effects of climate change facing women and girls in the Caribbean. The extensive consultative process involved roundtable discussions, capacity-building sessions, and one-on-one consultations, shedding light on the preconceptions held by both men and women toward women and girls in Jamaica and Guyana during 2023. The partnership has honed in on social norms as a focal point, recognizing their impact on perceptions and discussions about the challenges faced by women and girls.

About the authors

Wazim Mowla is the associate director and fellow of the Caribbean Initiative at the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center. He leads the development and execution of the initiative’s programming, including the Financial Inclusion Task Force, the US-Caribbean Consultative Group, the PACC 2030 Working Group, and the Caribbean Energy Working Group. Since joining the Council, Mowla has co-authored major publications on the strategic importance of sending US COVID-19 vaccines to the Caribbean, strategies to address financial de-risking, and how the United States can advance new policies to support climate and energy resilience. As part of his work on the Caribbean, Mowla was called to provide Congressional testimony to the US House Financial Services Committee on financial de-risking.

Valentina Sader is a deputy director at the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, where she leads the Center’s work on Brazil, gender equality and diversity, and manages the Center’s Advisory Council. During her time at the Council, Valentina has managed the launch of the Center’s Advisory Council, a high-level group of former policy makers, business leaders, and influencers from the United States and the region. She has co-authored publications on the US-Brazil strategic partnership and coordinated events with high-level policymakers, business leaders, and civil society members in both Brazil and the US. She also provides English- and Portuguese-language commentary on political and economic issues in Brazil to major media outlets, such as Al Jazeera and BBC Brasil.

The Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center broadens understanding of regional transformations and delivers constructive, results-oriented solutions to inform how the public and private sectors can advance hemispheric prosperity.

Learn more

The post Not without her: A roadmap for gender equality and Caribbean prosperity appeared first on Atlantic Council.

On October 24, Imran Bayoumi, associate director at the Scowcroft Strategy Initiative in the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, and Wazim Mowla, associate director and fellow of the Caribbean Initiative at the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, were published in The Globe and Mail and featured on the Canadian Forces College’s Spotlight on Military News and International Affairs. They discuss the Canada-CARICOM Strategic Partnership (CCSP) announced in October 2023 and argue that, while the partnership is an excellent first step, it requires actionable steps toward implementation on the core priorities of “strengthening regional security, addressing climate challenges, and increasing access to finance.”

Staff

Imran Bayoumi

Associate Director

Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security Scowcroft Strategy Initiative

Staff

Wazim Mowla

Associate Director & Fellow, Caribbean Initiative

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Caribbean China

The post Bayoumi and Mowla in The Globe and Mail and Canadian Forces College on the Canadian-Caribbean partnership appeared first on Atlantic Council.

A report by the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center in partnership with the US Department of State. This readout was informed by multi-stakeholder dialogues focused on facilitating greater, constructive exchange among multi-sectoral thought leaders and government leaders as they work to implement Summit commitments.

Executive summary

The Democracy and Governance commitment at the Ninth Summit of the Americas marked an imperative platform for strengthening the region’s democratic values and institutions. As the experts deliberated how to incorporate those values into practice, they stressed the importance of good governance for the advancement of human rights,
anticorruption practices, sustainable development, and citizen inclusion. Partnering with regional stakeholders will be imperative for crucial issues like civic engagement, transparency, adherence to international order, and the rule of law, encouraging Latin American and Caribbean countries to continue to prioritize their work in democratic renewal.

Recommendations for advancing and institutionalizing democratic practices in the Americas:

Report

Nov 8, 2023

Future of the Cities Summit of the Americas

By Willow Fortunoff, Diego Area

The first-ever Cities Summit of the Americas created a new platform for mayors across the hemisphere to build partnerships with civil society organizations–particularly those focused on the region and/or local governance–private sector companies, and one another.

Civil Society Energy Markets & Governance

Summit of the Americas

Amid global uncertainties and new challenges, the ninth Summit of the Americas is a renewed opportunity to bring about hemispheric cooperation and consensus to reach regional prosperity and security.

Public Event Thu, March 17, 2022 • 12:00 pm ET

Road to the Summit: A green and equitable future for the Americas

A conversation to generate strategies for green and equitable economic growth across the Americas.

Americas Climate Change & Climate Action Economy & Business Inclusive Growth

Online Event Thu, January 27, 2022 • 2:00 pm ET

Road to the Summit. Responding to the next disaster: Building health and climate resilience in the Americas

A conversation to generate strategies for creating stronger hemispheric collaboration ahead of the ninth Summit of the Americas.

Americas Caribbean Climate Change & Climate Action Latin America

Online Event Fri, June 10, 2022 • 10:00 pm ET

The joint future of the Caribbean working with Latin America

A series of discussions featuring heads of state and government following the conclusion of the Summit of the Americas.

Related experts

Staff

Diego Area

Deputy Director, Strategic Development

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Crisis Management Democratic Transitions

Staff

Wazim Mowla

Associate Director & Fellow, Caribbean Initiative

Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center

Caribbean China

The Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center broadens understanding of regional transformations and delivers constructive, results-oriented solutions to inform how the public and private sectors can advance hemispheric prosperity.

Learn more

The post The future of democracy in the Americas appeared first on Atlantic Council.

All eyes are on China’s “Two Sessions” this week, the annual gatherings of China’s rubber-stamp legislature and top political advisory body, where the hope is Premier Li Qiang’s first government work report will produce something – anything – to spur confidence in China’s economic trajectory.

While Li is likely to announce tactical measures to boost short-term confidence in the economy, there is little sign more robust stimulus measures are coming.

More fundamentally, as noted in this month’s edition of Global China, Xi Jinping has not indicated he will relax government control over the economy or initiate long-deferred structural reforms required to prevent economic stagnation.

Meanwhile, Li’s work report may underscore China’s strategy to push back on US global leadership through greater engagement with the Global South, as laid out in Xi’s speech to the Party’s Foreign Affairs Work Conference in December.

But will China’s bid to “lead” the Global South be hobbled by long-term economic stagnation?

That was a central question at the Global China Hub’s conference last month, “China in the Global South: Development and influence in a shifting global order”. Experts debated the impact of a sharp contraction of Belt and Road Initiative-related loans in the wake of China’s slowdown and Beijing’s shifting risk appetite in developing countries – and whether this opens up opportunities for other lenders.

Bottom line: Given the strategic importance Beijing has assigned the Global South, Beijing will devise new ways to bolster its influence in the developing world – particularly in the technology domain – even as it pivots from bankrolling new infrastructure projects.

Our editor-in-chief Tiff Roberts has much more on all this and everyone’s favorite hot topic, TikTok, below… Take it away, Tiff!

-David O. Shullman, Senior Director, Atlantic Council Global China Hub