During a recent meeting of the House Foreign Affairs Western Hemisphere Subcommittee, Chairwoman Maria Salazar (R-Fla.) laid out an eyebrow-raising vision of the U.S. role in Latin America’s affairs under the so-called Donroe Doctrine. Salazar praised President Donald Trump for strong-arming Colombian President Gustavo Petro into temporarily re-initiating Colombia’s failed drug war against Clan de Golfo . She fawned over a deadly American oil embargo of Cuba, urging Trump to “pull the plug” on Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel’s government. And she framed the illegal capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro as a bold move that “spread freedom and democracy” across Latin America.
But most important, and least remarked upon, were the congresswoman’s comments about ports. Praising the Trump administration’s successful effort to kick Chinese-linked port operator CK Hutchison from sites near the Panama Canal, Salazar turned her attention to the Port of Chancay in Peru — the State Department’s latest target in its effort to root out Chinese influence in Latin America.
Conjuring the specter of Chinese “dual usage” of the deep-water port, Salazar commanded the next Peruvian government to “take it back” from Chinese operator COSCO Shipping, clarifying that “the United States will help them.” Recall that the Trump administration’s opening stance on the Panama Canal was to take it back by force , and Salazar’s offer of help starts to sound a lot more ominous.
The upcoming election
In the months leading up to Peru’s runoff elections , the State Department has gotten into a couple of near-spats with the Casa de Pizarro .
First, in February, the State Department publicly warned that Peru risked its “ sovereignty ” after a local judge exempted COSCO Shipping from standard regulatory oversight. Then, on April 21, U.S. Ambassador Bernie Navarro tore into interim President José María Balcázar’s government, after he backed out of a $2 billion procurement deal for Lockheed Martin F-16 fighter jets. Navarro wrote on X that he would use “every available tool” against those who negotiate “in bad faith” with the U.S. One day later, Balcázar backed down and made the purchase, after his defense minister and foreign minister resigned .
All of this played out against the backdrop of escalating, dysfunctional presidential politics, which recently culminated in the impeachment and removal from office of previous interim President Jose Jeri by lawmakers allied with far-right Presidential candidate Rafael Lopez Aliaga , over accusations that Jeri may have had corrupt dealings with Chinese businessmen. Aliaga is an ally of the State Department and a Peruvian railway magnate who is best known for building his vast fortune during the aggressive state privatization drives of the late 1990s under President Alberto Fujimori's government, when Aliaga and his business partners secured long-term monopoly concessions to operate the country's southern rail networks. These are conveniently located near Peru’s highly-profitable copper mines and the borders with Chile and Bolivia , linking them to the ports of Matarani and (potentially) Corio . In other words, Aliaga’s interests compete directly with COSCO Shipping’s port in Chancay and a proposed Chinese and Brazilian venture to link that port via rail to the mines of central Peru. Aliaga has made no secret of this.
So, with Peru currently navigating a deeply polarized, fractured election season, in a broader context that has seen the country replace its leader eight times in the past ten years, the State Department has identified a fragile political environment that is ripe for leverage. Instability in Lima provides Washington with a strategic opening to fan the flames of anti-Chinese sentiment.
Through a feedback loop between CSIS and the Pentagon , Washington is implying without evidence that the Chinese intend to use the port of Chancay as a forward operating base, and thus indirectly supporting a presidential candidate who trades in similar Sinophobic tropes and who has a vested interest in America’s preferred outcome: giving COSCO Shipping the boot and further integrating Peru’s southern rail networks with nearby ports.
The fortress economy
Squint at a map and a possible maritime “grand strategy” of the Donroe Doctrine becomes clear. If the U.S. controls the Panama Canal, the oil export terminals of Venezuela, and the mineral ports of Peru and Chile, it gives Washington veto power over Chinese capital’s ability to extract, purchase, and transport energy and mineral commodities from South America. Such a strategy would starve China’s industrial base and renewable energy sector, while securing the inputs necessary for America’s re-industrialization.
While regime change in Venezuela and Cuba are the clear ideological prizes of the Donroe Doctrine, and the Orinoco Belt is the crown jewel of the pirate’s booty, there are plenty of other contests playing out right now across Latin America, from control over underseas cables in Chile , to dominion over the minerals hiding under long-protected environmental wonders in Argentina and Ecuador , and to the integration of logistics networks, including rail and ports, to serve the future needs of capital accumulation in our American fortress economy — which stands at the precipice of an epochal energy transition .
The Trump administration’s broader goals of boosting domestic energy production and electric vehicle infrastructure require a guaranteed flow of energy and mineral commodities in enormous quantities. Washington’s maritime strategy appears designed to provide this guarantee, and is being codified at every level at statecraft. Initiatives like the Critical Minerals Ministerial and the Shield of the Americas summit are explicitly designed to align South American resource extraction with U.S. economic and security priorities near key chokepoints and trade corridors.
Yet, this strategy is most tangibly confirmed by somewhat banal domestic infrastructure initiatives, like “ America’s Maritime Action Plan ,” and planned and ongoing dredging operations in ports near Houston , Corpus Christi , Los Angeles , and Norfolk, Virginia . These efforts, designed in part to facilitate exports of oil extracted at home, prepare the U.S. to ship, receive, and unload a massive, redirected flow of Andean resources, completing a supply chain that begins in the oil fields of Venezuela and the copper mines of Peru, and ends in America’s refineries and future industrial plants.
While lawmakers demand the dispossession of another Chinese port under that thinnest of moral justifications — that what’s bad for our “enemy” is good for us — the Blob should do some serious soul-searching. Imagine a foreign policy that promoted regional stability through trade, reduced migration within Latin America by fostering well-paying jobs in the domestic industrial sector, and safeguarded Pachamama’s environmental treasures for future generations to enjoy. No cloak and dagger diplomacy . No fanning the flames of domestic politics. No undermining economic sovereignty via the dictates of multilateral development banks. Just a relationship predicated on mutual respect, shared history, and trade. Why should the people we consider our closest neighbors deserve any less?