
Trump Rattles Latin America by Exploring Use of Military Force
The New York Times reported Friday that the president ordered the Defense Department to prepare options to take military action against Latin American drug cartels. A US agreement with Mexico to expand security cooperation, expected to be signed in the coming weeks, would facilitate joint monitoring of criminal organizations by security forces and coordination on the border.
But the pending agreement won't provide legal grounds for direct US military action on Mexican territory, officials have said. Any such intervention would risk inflaming anti-US sentiments already whipped up by the Trump administration's wave of tariffs.
'This could call into question the security agreement that was drawn up, which is based on a great deal of trust,' said Victoria Dittmar, a researcher at Insight Crime who specializes in Mexico.
Spokespeople at the White House and Pentagon declined to comment.
The emerging plans to deal with cartels build on the Trump administration's already more aggressive presence in a region that is deeply integrated into the US economy, from cross-border gas pipelines to maritime logistics.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited Central America on his first overseas trip, pushing for concessions on US military use of the Panama Canal. The administration has engaged in a war of words with Colombia's leftist president Gustavo Petro and may be preparing to decertify that country's efforts against narcotics. Officials have also stepped up allegations against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro as a drug lord, doubling a reward for information leading to his arrest to $50 million this week.
The hardening of US policy toward Latin America has been met with varying responses in the region, from open arms to strident opposition. In Ecuador, the pro-US government is preparing a referendum that would allow foreign military installations in national territory, a move seen as clearning the way for the US to reactivate the use of a base in the violence-torn country.
But in Mexico, President Claudia Sheinbaum has responded defiantly to any suggestion that American soldiers would take a combat role in her country. Any agreement with the Trump administration must respect the nation's sovereignty, she reiterated Friday at her daily news conference.
'The United States is not going to come to Mexico with the military,' she said Friday. 'We cooperate, we collaborate, but there will be no invasion. That is out of the question, absolutely out of the question. What has been stated in all the calls is that it is not permitted, nor is it part of any agreement, much less.'
The security deal in the works rests on the idea that the US won't intervene in Mexico, said Dittmar of Insight Crime.
'If that were to be broken, it would indeed break the relationship of trust and would require a rethinking of joint security strategies,' she said.
The Trump administration's approach risks inviting a broader backlash in a region still scarred by decades of Cold War-era intervention from Guatemala to Chile.
'This will strengthen autocratic regimes like the ones in Venezuela or Nicaragua, and the anti-American sentiment in Mexico, Guatemala and even in Colombia,' said Jorge Restrepo, an economics professor who directs CERAC, a Bogota-based research institution that monitors the nation's civil conflict.
'Just the announcement will have the unintended effect of strengthening governments which are not cooperating as much as they could with the United States,' Restrepo said.
US interests in the region could become soft targets for criminal organizations, said James Bosworth, founder of political risk firm Hxagon, in a phone interview. The cartels have the ability to take the fight to US territory in a way that al-Qaeda 'could only dream of,' according to Bosworth.
While Venezuela, Colombia and Honduras are all potential targets, Mexico is the country that is most vulnerable, especially since Trump officials are much more worried about fentanyl then they are about cocaine, Bosworth said. Trump made a promise to fight trafficking of fentanyl, originating in China and responsible for tens of thousands of US deaths, a key point of his 2024 campaign.
Despite stepped-up rhetoric from Washington, Venezuela could be shielded from intervention by US oil interests and concerns about disrupting a steady flow of reverse migration, said Geoff Ramsey, who tracks Venezuela at the Atlantic Council.
'This is an instance in which Trump is seeking to project strength but ultimately understands that any kind of military action in Venezuela would run completely contrary to US interests,' said Ramsey. 'Unfortunately, Maduro knows that this is a bluff. But the opposition doesn't. And I think this is going to fuel a lot of counterproductive daydreaming from the opposition. And my fear is that this is only going to lead them down the path of magical thinking.'
The US posturing also risks playing into Venezuela's siege narrative. The country's armed forces on Friday vowed 'to confront, combat, and neutralize any action that threatens the stability and peace of our citizens, as well as the safeguarding of our national territory.'
And on state television, Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino Lopez reiterated denials that Venezuela hosts organized crime groups. 'There are no criminal gangs operating here, they have taken the story of the Tren de Aragua, they have been completely dismantled, they do not exist, nor do cartels or bosses exist,' Padrino said.
Ramsey said US military action in Venezuela 'would risk destabilizing the entire country, and potentially the region itself.'
With assistance from Scott Squires.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Mint
19 minutes ago
- Mint
Who is Stephan Miran? Did you know Trump's interim Fed pick is the ‘mind' behind his tariffs?
United States President Donald Trump has appointed Dr Stephen Miran as the temporary appointee to the Federal Reserve Board until January 31, 2026, filling the seat left vacant by the surprise resignation of Governor Adriana Kugler. In a statement posted on Truth Social, Trump said: 'It is my great honor to announce that I have chosen Dr. Stephen Miran. He has been with me from the beginning of my Second Term, and his expertise in the World of Economics is unparalleled. He will do an outstanding job.' Miran, 42, is currently serving the US government as the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors. He is often credited as the 'mind' behind Trump's economic policies including the tariffs. He has been a prominent figure in conservative economic policy, shaping key financial strategies under Trump since the beginning of the president's second term. Previously, he served in the Treasury Department under Secretary Steven Mnuchin, where he was assigned the position to design the Paycheck Protection Program during the 2020 COVID-19 crisis. Other than serving the U.S. government, Miran has worked as a senior strategist at Hudson Bay Capital Management and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. He is known for his strong economic views, such as publicly criticizing the Federal Reserve's pandemic-era stimulus policies. He has also authored 'Mar-A-Lago Accord,' a controversial proposal that suggests dollar devaluation as a way to address the U.S. current account deficit. His economic stance aligns closely with Trump's viewpoints, as he is a strong advocate for not just reciprocal tariffs but also pro-crypto initiatives. Miran earned his bachelor's degree in Economics, Philosophy, and Mathematics from the prestigious Boston University in 2005, and went on to complete a PhD in Economics at Harvard University in 2010. Miran was the son of Dan and Jane Miran who served as civil servants at theSocial Security Administration.


Economic Times
21 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Trump attack on Intel's CEO could compound factory struggles
NYT News Service FILE -- Utility infrastructure under construction in Johnstown, Ohio, to support a planned Intel chip manufacturing plant, Jan. 3, 2025. Intel's challenges in Ohio highlight both the risks that federal and state officials took in financially backing Intel, and the struggles the Trump administration will face in trying to shift more semiconductor production from Asia to the U.S. (Brian Kaiser/The New York Times) At the end of July, Gov. Mike DeWine of Ohio said Intel's chief executive was "very, very optimistic" about the company's plans to build multibillion-dollar semiconductor factories in his state. Last week, President Donald Trump attacked the tech executive, and a Republican senator called for an investigation into delays surrounding Intel's massive construction project outside Columbus. Trump demanded Thursday that Lip-Bu Tan, Intel's new CEO, resign over his past ties to Chinese companies, adding to the woes of a company that DeWine and other senior figures in Ohio's Republican Party had said would help create a manufacturing boom and turn the state into a "Silicon Heartland." To help build its Ohio factories, Intel received commitments worth roughly $1.5 billion in federal funding in recent years, as well as a $2 billion incentive package from the state. The project has been badly delayed, and the chipmaker said this year that the factories would not be operational until at least 2030. The company's challenges in Ohio highlight the risks that federal and state officials took when they financially backed Intel, a once-powerful force in chip manufacturing, an industry now dominated by the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Intel's situation is also indicative of the struggles the Trump administration will face as it tries -- through the pressure of tariffs and threats from the White House -- to shift the bulk of semiconductor production to the United States from Asia. When the Biden administration offered financial incentives through the CHIPS Act, Intel was one of the few American companies that it made sense to back. But whether by stick or carrot, forcing this transition could prove extraordinarily difficult, as the delays around the Ohio project demonstrate. "It's pretty obvious that Intel has failed to meet the commitments it made to the people of Ohio," Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, wrote on social media Thursday. "Now we find out its new CEO is deeply conflicted with ties to the CCP," he said, referring to the Chinese Communist Party. "The CEO must immediately resign, the project completed, and a fraud investigation should be initiated by Ohio," Moreno added. Semiconductor factories are extremely expensive and complicated to build. Intel has struggled to find enough customers to stay afloat as it poured money into construction. After posting an $18.8 billion loss in 2024 in its foundry division, the company ousted its CEO in December, cut 15,000 jobs and appeared to be exploring other strategies, including the possible sale of its manufacturing business to TSMC. Asked for comment, a spokesperson for Intel referred to its most recent earnings report from July, in which the company said it was committed to completing the project in Ohio but had slowed construction to match customer demand. Dan Tierney, press secretary for DeWine, said Friday that the governor remained optimistic about the project. "We expect chips to be made in that facility," Tierney said. He added that the company had already invested $7 billion in the construction project in Ohio, more than three times the amount of the state's incentive package, which involves some tax credits that have yet to be paid out. The incentive package is tied to job creation by the end of 2028, so the earliest that the state would attempt to claw back any money is 2029, Tierney said. As for the allegations against Tan, he said, DeWine is concerned about any allegation of involvement with the Chinese Communist Party that is detrimental to the national interest but is not rushing to judgment. "We don't have all the facts, and we will need to see what facts come out," Tierney said. The stakes are high for Intel and Ohio. Semiconductor chips, which are used in everything from cellphones to fighter jets, have recently become a particular focus for Trump, as they were for former President Joe Biden. Both presidents viewed domestic production as critical to national security, especially as more than 90% of the world's most advanced chips were produced in Taiwan, an island claimed by China. In 2022, under Biden, Congress passed a bill with bipartisan support that aimed to remedy that vulnerability by pouring billions of dollars into subsidies for semiconductor companies to build facilities in the United States. Intel, the only American-owned maker of advanced logic chips, was awarded up to $7.9 billion to build factories in the United States. (Only about $2 billion of that has been disbursed.) Trump has criticized the subsidy approach, arguing that tariffs are a more effective tool to bring manufacturing back to the United States. He threatened last week to impose a 100% duty on many imported chips. Tan, who took over Intel in March, has been hailed as a savior of the struggling American chipmaker. He is a longtime Silicon Valley investor who focused on semiconductor startups, even during eras when venture capital money seemed to be pouring into software and apps. On July 28, a company that Tan once ran pleaded guilty to transferring technology that was under U.S. export controls to Chinese entities. Though the plea agreement with the Justice Department did not name Tan, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., wrote to the chair of Intel's board of directors Tuesday, raising questions about what Tan may have known about the illicit activity. In a statement Thursday, Tan, an American citizen who was born in Malaysia, said that "misinformation" was circulating about his past roles and that he fully shared "the president's commitment to advancing U.S. national and economic security." "I have always operated within the highest legal and ethical standards," Tan said. He added that he was engaging with the administration "to address the matters that have been raised and ensure they have the facts." The questions surrounding Tan could create yet another hurdle in the attempt to bring the manufacturing of advanced semiconductors to Ohio. Sen. Jon Husted, R-Ohio, was among the lawmakers who supported public funding for the Intel semiconductor factory. He posted a message on social media saying the company had promised to "respond promptly" to Cotton's letter. "The facts have not changed: We need an American company to make American chips on American soil," Husted wrote. "Producing the world's most advanced high-tech chips in the U.S. is not just economic policy -- it's a national security imperative. Every day we are not doing that, we are putting our country at risk." Husted did not respond to a request for comment. State Sen. Bill DeMora, a Democrat representing Columbus, said Ohio Republicans were using Trump's attack on Tan to distract from the fact that they sank public money into a project that has stalled. DeMora, who has long called the project a boondoggle, said in an interview Friday that Ohio Republicans "did all this hoopla and pageantry" to hype the Intel project. "Now they want the Intel president to step down because he has ties to China," he said. "That's their excuse." He said construction had continued with a fraction of the workers the company had promised to hire. He predicted that the site would never become a semiconductor factory. "Intel is never going to make a chip there," he said. Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. BlackRock returns, this time with Ambani. Will it be lucky second time? The airport lounge war has begun — and DreamFolks is losing End of an era: The Maggi Man who rebuilt Nestlé India bows out India's last cement IPO did not work. Can JSW Cement break that curse? Is Shadowfax closing in on its closest rival? Stock Radar: APL Apollo Tubes stock fails to hold momentum after hitting highs in June; what should traders do? Buy, Sell or Hold: Avendus trims target on Titan Company; Motila Oswal maintains buy on Jindal Stainless These large- and mid-cap stocks may give more than 25% return in 1 year, according to analysts


News18
21 minutes ago
- News18
"5 Pak Jets, 1 ELINT Or AEW&C" India Scores "Longest Surface-To-Air Kill" With S-400 In Op Sindoor
In May 2025, during Operation Sindoor, the Indian Air Force shot down six Pakistani aircraft using the S-400 missile system, achieving a record 314 km surface-to-air kill. IAF Chief Amar Preet Singh called the S-400 a "game changer," highlighting India's advanced military capabilities and strategic autonomy.00:00 INTRODUCTION03:03 'POLITICAL WILL, CLEAR DIRECTIONS AND NO RESTRICTIONS'04:50 OPPOSITION CITES 'TRUMP PRESSURE' n18oc_crux