his article offers a new approach to regional political dilemmas. At the outset, Central America (Guatemala, Belize, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama) should have strategic autonomy and the ability to effectively make independent decisions to balance relations with the major powers. In short, the best way to navigate the United States and the People’s Republic of China’s strategic competition is through soft power.
I believe the U.S. can and should become more effective in its relations with the region. As John Baylis, author and professor of National Security Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School, argues, the U.S. has pursued “absolute security,” which many other states saw as a threat to themselves. It used all types of power to reshape all forms of politics everywhere in the world at once. This affected the distribution of power and its use. A new approach to regional engagement is necessary.
There is room for diverse political thought without the need to adopt the policies of hegemonic powers. For example, the U.S. “convinced” some Central American nations to send military forces to the region at the outset of the Iraq War. The decision to send troops was one of the lowest points in regional history made by civilian policymakers by allowing the U.S. to exercise control over the heads of government. We recall that this military adventure was not approved by the United Nations and was fueled by lies about the existence of weapons of mass destruction. Despite its erratic past, I believe Central America can improve its relationship with the U.S. by looking at history objectively.
Are the BRICS a Viable Alternative?
The BRICS group (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) are considered the source of the new multipolar world by many. On the verge of a new potential Cold War between China and the United States, I propose modifying Central American regional geopolitical relations to allow for competition in regional development. For example, Reuters: “The Group of Seven (G7) has already pledged to raise $600 billion in private and public funds over five years to finance needed infrastructure in developing countries and counter China’s older, multi-trillion-dollar Belt and Road project.” The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a massive China-led infrastructure project to enhance world connectivity, including ports, railroads, airports, dams, bridges, and energy.
This competition between the superpowers has created multiple sources of financing for infrastructure and development. For example, the New Development Bank has allocated over $30 billion in loans since its creation. Furthermore, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (the world’s second-largest investment bank) has approved $37 billion in infrastructure projects. This means that the approach of Central America to the Belt and Road or the BRICS is not only a country-to-county approach but a strong multilateral relationship.
The overriding goal of this article is to suggest a modification of regional geopolitical alignments and allow development competition. In short, with all due respect for national sovereignty, Guatemala and Belize should join the rest of the nations in Central America to recognize the One China Policy. I understand this is not an easy choice because of pressure from f the U.S. (although the U.S. recognizes the One China Policy). Further, the PRC, in all due respect for national sovereignty decisions, should meet halfway in knowing the two nations’ difficult position and showing some flexibility by allowing Taipei’s commercial mission to be opened in Guatemala, representing the Central America bloc, just as more than 50 nations now have commercial missions while recognizing the One China Policy.
The complexity of the situation was predicted by Kissinger’s statement in his book “Years of Upheaval,” where he said, “As ambassador, I grappled with an issue of immediate urgency: how to separate our China policy from our Taiwan policy. ...The ultimate solution could only be an official policy of ‘One China,’ which we would recognize, with the detail of implementation yet to be worked out.”
Suppose Belize and Guatemala accept the One China Policy. In that case, all Central American countries can also apply as individual nations for membership in BRICS and the Belt and Road Initiative. However, Central America should negotiate as a bloc for regional mega-projects. Examples of significant infrastructure projects could include:
- A dry canal, a deep-water port in the Pacific and the Atlantic connected by rail and roads and Free Trade Zones for manufacturing.
- A railroad connecting the capital and major cities between Guatemala and Panama.
- Airports and highways to boost tourism and trade.
- Clean energy projects (geothermal, hydro, wind, solar.)
Amitav Acharya, an expert in international relations, argues that a significant advantage of joining is that the BRICS will have a voice in the new world order. For example, according to the Asian Development Bank, by 2025, China and India will account for 35% of global GDP, while the U.S. will account for 12%. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) estimates that the Global South could account for 57% of the global GDP by 2030.
Toward a Multilateral Strategy
Because some of its members have allied with the U.S., BRICS should not be seen as a bloc that seeks to contest with the United States for hegemonic power. An example is India, a founding member who also maintains the status of “Major Defense Partner” (which the U.S. allows to procure sensitive defense technology). It is about diversifying its development options. Therefore, countries should not be afraid to join the BRICS since some of its members are also major U.S. trade partners.
These propositions are not to antagonize the U.S.; instead, it is about helping them not to approach the region in hubris and understand how to cooperate with the region. In this matter, John Baylis, as before, argues that to remain relevant, the American-centric and Western-centric definitions of strategy and security will have to accommodate ideas and approaches that reflect the advantages and perspectives of these emerging powers, even if these new perspectives do not quite replace older western-centric definitions.
Projects implemented by BRICS membership will create jobs, dramatically reduce the number of Central Americans who cannot find employment in the region, decrease violence and, with this, stop the waves of migration and diminish the “brain drain.”
Benefits from Competition
The U.S. already competes for influence in countries having diverse political systems. The U.S. currently competes with China in the Indo-Pacific, e.g., Singapore, Vietnam, and India, where regardless of their level of democratic development, the U.S. and other nations see the opportunity to build relationships and influence through soft power. These nations benefit from the competition between the U.S. and China. Why can’t they have the same approach to sovereign nations in Central America?
If all the Central American nations recognize the One China Policy, we can join the BRICS and the Belt and Road Initiative and participate in development projects as a bloc. Then we envision proposing mega-projects to help the entire region. Guatemala and Belize, by accepting this proposal, would be a significant step toward regional economic development; joining BRICS does not restrain a government from pursuing its foreign policy. And maybe this regional geopolitical realignment could be where the U.S. and China can start understanding one another.
a global affairs media network
Central America Could Foster Coexistence Between U.S. and China
Rooftop view of the León cathedral in León, Nicaragua. Photo by Uday Misra on Unsplash
June 7, 2023
Central American countries should, as a bloc, seek to join the BRICS countries. This would both bolster development in the region and act as a diplomatic bridge between China and the United States argues former consul general from Nicaragua to Mexico Pablo Baltodano.
T
his article offers a new approach to regional political dilemmas. At the outset, Central America (Guatemala, Belize, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama) should have strategic autonomy and the ability to effectively make independent decisions to balance relations with the major powers. In short, the best way to navigate the United States and the People’s Republic of China’s strategic competition is through soft power.
I believe the U.S. can and should become more effective in its relations with the region. As John Baylis, author and professor of National Security Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School, argues, the U.S. has pursued “absolute security,” which many other states saw as a threat to themselves. It used all types of power to reshape all forms of politics everywhere in the world at once. This affected the distribution of power and its use. A new approach to regional engagement is necessary.
There is room for diverse political thought without the need to adopt the policies of hegemonic powers. For example, the U.S. “convinced” some Central American nations to send military forces to the region at the outset of the Iraq War. The decision to send troops was one of the lowest points in regional history made by civilian policymakers by allowing the U.S. to exercise control over the heads of government. We recall that this military adventure was not approved by the United Nations and was fueled by lies about the existence of weapons of mass destruction. Despite its erratic past, I believe Central America can improve its relationship with the U.S. by looking at history objectively.
Are the BRICS a Viable Alternative?
The BRICS group (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) are considered the source of the new multipolar world by many. On the verge of a new potential Cold War between China and the United States, I propose modifying Central American regional geopolitical relations to allow for competition in regional development. For example, Reuters: “The Group of Seven (G7) has already pledged to raise $600 billion in private and public funds over five years to finance needed infrastructure in developing countries and counter China’s older, multi-trillion-dollar Belt and Road project.” The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a massive China-led infrastructure project to enhance world connectivity, including ports, railroads, airports, dams, bridges, and energy.
This competition between the superpowers has created multiple sources of financing for infrastructure and development. For example, the New Development Bank has allocated over $30 billion in loans since its creation. Furthermore, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (the world’s second-largest investment bank) has approved $37 billion in infrastructure projects. This means that the approach of Central America to the Belt and Road or the BRICS is not only a country-to-county approach but a strong multilateral relationship.
The overriding goal of this article is to suggest a modification of regional geopolitical alignments and allow development competition. In short, with all due respect for national sovereignty, Guatemala and Belize should join the rest of the nations in Central America to recognize the One China Policy. I understand this is not an easy choice because of pressure from f the U.S. (although the U.S. recognizes the One China Policy). Further, the PRC, in all due respect for national sovereignty decisions, should meet halfway in knowing the two nations’ difficult position and showing some flexibility by allowing Taipei’s commercial mission to be opened in Guatemala, representing the Central America bloc, just as more than 50 nations now have commercial missions while recognizing the One China Policy.
The complexity of the situation was predicted by Kissinger’s statement in his book “Years of Upheaval,” where he said, “As ambassador, I grappled with an issue of immediate urgency: how to separate our China policy from our Taiwan policy. ...The ultimate solution could only be an official policy of ‘One China,’ which we would recognize, with the detail of implementation yet to be worked out.”
Suppose Belize and Guatemala accept the One China Policy. In that case, all Central American countries can also apply as individual nations for membership in BRICS and the Belt and Road Initiative. However, Central America should negotiate as a bloc for regional mega-projects. Examples of significant infrastructure projects could include:
- A dry canal, a deep-water port in the Pacific and the Atlantic connected by rail and roads and Free Trade Zones for manufacturing.
- A railroad connecting the capital and major cities between Guatemala and Panama.
- Airports and highways to boost tourism and trade.
- Clean energy projects (geothermal, hydro, wind, solar.)
Amitav Acharya, an expert in international relations, argues that a significant advantage of joining is that the BRICS will have a voice in the new world order. For example, according to the Asian Development Bank, by 2025, China and India will account for 35% of global GDP, while the U.S. will account for 12%. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) estimates that the Global South could account for 57% of the global GDP by 2030.
Toward a Multilateral Strategy
Because some of its members have allied with the U.S., BRICS should not be seen as a bloc that seeks to contest with the United States for hegemonic power. An example is India, a founding member who also maintains the status of “Major Defense Partner” (which the U.S. allows to procure sensitive defense technology). It is about diversifying its development options. Therefore, countries should not be afraid to join the BRICS since some of its members are also major U.S. trade partners.
These propositions are not to antagonize the U.S.; instead, it is about helping them not to approach the region in hubris and understand how to cooperate with the region. In this matter, John Baylis, as before, argues that to remain relevant, the American-centric and Western-centric definitions of strategy and security will have to accommodate ideas and approaches that reflect the advantages and perspectives of these emerging powers, even if these new perspectives do not quite replace older western-centric definitions.
Projects implemented by BRICS membership will create jobs, dramatically reduce the number of Central Americans who cannot find employment in the region, decrease violence and, with this, stop the waves of migration and diminish the “brain drain.”
Benefits from Competition
The U.S. already competes for influence in countries having diverse political systems. The U.S. currently competes with China in the Indo-Pacific, e.g., Singapore, Vietnam, and India, where regardless of their level of democratic development, the U.S. and other nations see the opportunity to build relationships and influence through soft power. These nations benefit from the competition between the U.S. and China. Why can’t they have the same approach to sovereign nations in Central America?
If all the Central American nations recognize the One China Policy, we can join the BRICS and the Belt and Road Initiative and participate in development projects as a bloc. Then we envision proposing mega-projects to help the entire region. Guatemala and Belize, by accepting this proposal, would be a significant step toward regional economic development; joining BRICS does not restrain a government from pursuing its foreign policy. And maybe this regional geopolitical realignment could be where the U.S. and China can start understanding one another.
