Why is Trump cutting aid to Central America
Editor's note:Tom Fowdy graduated with an Msc. in Chinese Studies from Oxford University after majoring in Politics at Durham University. He has published a number of pieces on the international relations of China and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. The article reflects the author's views, and not necessarily those of APD.
Over the weekend, the Trump administration announced that it was suspending foreign aid to a number of Central American countries, including: El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. In justifying the decision, a spokesperson noted that aid must be conditional on the given state serving “American strategic interests.”
Critics responded with dismay, noting that by cutting such support the Presidency was further sending such countries into poverty, thus creating more pressure for outward immigration from these countries towards the U.S., which of course, the administration is also opposed to, thus making it seem like a counterproductive move.
But what exactly is going on here? At this point, the Trump administration is well known to behave in a transactional manner in the mantra of “America First,” threatening, coercing and cutting off support for countries that do not comply with its strictly unilateral hegemonic vision. But there is more to it than that. Over the past year we have also witnessed the rise of a “Neo-Monroe” doctrine towards the Americas, that being an effort to secure an exclusive and undisputed dominance of the entire Western hemisphere.
South American migrants are receiving free legal advice on obtaining U.S. citizenship, at an event organized by the Teamsters Union in Los Angeles, March 30, 2019. /VCG Photo
On that note, these countries are being targeted because they are making interest-based choices, which Washington finds antagonistic, thus like Venezuela and Cuba, it is bringing the hammer down on them.
First of all, the Trump administration employs a strictly transactional and value void interpretation of foreign aid. In sharp contrast to his predecessor Barack Obama, who interpreted foreign aid not just in the light of strategic interests but the projection of American soft power, humanitarianism and values, Trump's “America First” is void of ethic.
For the current White House, countries should receive aid not because it is the right thing to do for their people or development, but for their willingness to kowtow to Washington's interests and benefits above all others. On that note, it is not afraid to cut aid or leverage it for countries who are not doing so. Thus, the administration has cut aid to Palestine, to Pakistan, re-wrote the U.S Africa policy on those terms and so on.
In line with this interest-centric approach to aid spending, the Trump administration has also pursued an assertive policy towards the Americas with the bid of reaffirming unilateral hegemony in the region. Owing from the legacy of early U.S President James Monroe, whom forced out European powers from the continent on the assertion that the region was exclusively America's sphere of interest, this policy has been termed a “Neo-Monroe” doctrine. The Trump administration has pursued this goal on numerous fronts.
An immigrant holds a placard reading "No to the wall" as he protests with other migrants from Central America at Reynosa-McAllen border crossing ahead of Trump's visit to the Texas border region, in Reynosa, Tamaulipas state, Mexico, January 10, 2019. /VCG Photo
First, he sought to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) on his own terms and end Mexico and Canada's right to make new agreements without Washington's consent. Secondly, he's taking a harder line on Cuba and also pursuing government change pressure in Venezuela, with Honduras also a publicly marked target. Then thirdly, the administration is also taking a harder line on regional countries who are pursuing closer ties with China.
This leads us to the case of El Salvador, one of the countries on the receiving end of the cuts. El Salvador a year ago changed its diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China, opening up diplomatic ties from Beijing and thus accepting the one-China policy. It is one of a series of regional countries to do so. Guatemala has been contemplating a similar move, which is why it also got targeted. It is worth noting that a year ago the U.S. recalled the ambassadors of several countries in the Americas who had switched ties.
Whilst Washington has sought to sustain all of these nations as client states, persistent interference has often come at a brutal expense to their development and well-being, rendering them impoverished and with little to gain from such hegemony. As a result, all of these countries have seen benefits in closer ties with Beijing. Now, they are being punished for it.
Given this, the Trump administration's approach to the Americas is very simple. You either without choice align with the U.S., or your country will suffer in the form of aid withdrawals, sanctions and even government change operations. Yet, it is nothing new because it is ultimately the way it has always been. Of course there is no greater irony in the end to continually perpetuating poverty, instability and crisis in Latin America and then complaining about immigration to the U.S. and inflaming racial tensions.
In this case it is a story of two walls. The one Trump wants to build on his own border, and the one he wants to build around the entire Western hemisphere in the pursuit of America First hegemony.
(CGTN)
