U.S. envoy says Trump's ‘unpredictability' on Venezuela, Cuba is an asset. Is it?
President Trump's recently appointed State Department special envoy to the Americas, Mauricio Claver-Carone, may be accused of many things — but being shy about speaking his mind is not one of them.
Claver-Carone, 50, who was born in Miami to Cuban immigrants, speaks fluent Spanish and served as top White House adviser on Latin American affairs during Trump's first term in office, made me raise my eyebrows several times during a one-hour interview last week. Among the things he said:
▪ When I asked him about Trump's dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) he suggested that the U.S. government will not only revise its foreign aid programs but also its contributions to regional organizations such as the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB.)
Claver-Carone, who served for about two years as IADB president, said the top regional development bank 'es un cuento,' which can be loosely translated as 'is a scam.' He said most people at the biggest regional development bank are there to benefit from U.S. visas and good pensions, rather than to help the region.
'What is its impact, and what does 'development' mean nowadays?' he asked. 'We must re-evaluate what development means.'
Claver-Carone was forced to leave the IADB in 2022 after an internal investigation charged him with having a romantic relationship with an aide and substantially increasing her salary. He has denied any improper conduct.
But Claver-Carone's criticism of the IADB raises questions about whether the Trump administration plans to maintain the U.S. financial contribution to the bank, which for decades has helped finance roads, bridges and key infrastructure projects in the region.
▪ Asked about Mexico, the U.S. envoy had surprisingly warm words toward leftist Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum. Talking about Trump's threat to impose a 25% tariff on Mexico, which Trump has justified in part by claiming there is an 'intolerable alliance' between the Mexican government and the drug cartels, Claver-Carone said that Sheinbaum 'has proved to be a great leader.'
He added, 'I have been impressed with President Sheinbaum, and with the way she has worked and collaborated, because I think she knows and understands that with controlled migration and the appropriate security policy, Mexico could be a much more successful country than it is.'
When I countered that Trump's mere threat of tariffs on Mexican goods is counter-productive, because it deters investments in Mexico, cripples the country's economy and drives up migration to the United States — the very thing Trump wants to prevent — Claver-Carone rejected that idea. He responded that pushing Mexico to eradicate the drug cartels will make it a more stable country, and fewer people will want to leave.
Anyway, Claver-Carone's unusually kind words toward Sheinbaum lead me to suspect that the Trump administration may be preparing to declare a face-saving victory in U.S.-Mexico talks on migration and drugs. That would allow Trump to postpone his early March deadline on Mexico to meet his demands to avoid the U.S. tariffs.
▪ On Nicaragua, one of the region's most brutal dictatorships, he said that the Trump administration is making rapid progress in talks with Central American countries and the Dominican Republic to expel Nicaragua from the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA.) That process is likely to start 'within months,' he said.
Losing preferential trade access to the U.S. market would be a major blow to the regime of Nicaraguan dictator Daniel Ortega. Without such benefit, Nicaragua's exports of coffee, sugar, cigars and other goods to the United States — by far its biggest export market — wouldn't be able to compete with those of El Salvador, Honduras and other countries in the region.
▪ On Argentina, Claver-Carone didn't sound too optimistic about President Javier Milei's proposal to sign a free trade deal with the United States. Noting that Trump is not too keen on free trade agreements, Claver-Carone said, 'An investment promotion agreement [with Argentina] is much more feasible than a free trade agreement.'
▪ On Venezuela, Claver-Carone disputed many analysts' perception that Trump has betrayed the Venezuelan opposition by striking a deportees-for-oil deal with the Maduro regime.
Trump has revoked Temporary Protected Status (TPS) from nearly 600,000 Venezuelan immigrants in the United States. His special envoy to Venezuela, Richard Grenell, met in Caracas with Maduro, after which Maduro accepted sending flights — paid for by the Venezuelan government — to bring back deportees from the United States, and released several U.S. hostages.
Meantime, contrary to Venezuelan opposition hopes that Trump would strengthen U.S. sanctions on Venezuela, the U.S. president has not revoked Chevron's license to operate in Venezuela. Chevron's oil exports are one of Venezuela's major sources of income.
'There have been no [U.S.] concessions,' Claver-Carone told me. He said that Maduro accepted U.S. demands to take deportees and release hostages because of fears that the Trump administration would impose drastic economic sanctions, like he did in his first term in office, if Venezuela didn't comply.
▪ On Cuba, much like with Venezuela, Trump's most effective strategy is to be unpredictable, and instill fear on the other side, Claver-Carone said.
'The worst thing that can happen is [for a government] to be predictable,' Claver-Carone told me. 'Being predictable helps other actors [your adversaries] anticipate your moves.'
After the interview, I couldn't help wondering whether the Trump administration is deliberately unpredictable, or is just saying that to cover a pattern of constant ad-libbing. The conflicting hard-line statements on Venezuela by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the smiling pictures of Trump's envoy Grenell in Caracas shaking hands with Maduro make me suspect there's a lot of chaos within Trump's inner circle.
But this administration is just beginning. We will soon know for sure whether it is guided by masterful negotiation, or terrible improvisation.
Don't miss the 'Oppenheimer Presenta' TV show on Sundays at 9 pm E.T. on CNN en Español. Blog: andresoppenheimer.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Four Days Left Until ecotel communication ag (ETR:E4C) Trades Ex-Dividend
Regular readers will know that we love our dividends at Simply Wall St, which is why it's exciting to see ecotel communication ag (ETR:E4C) is about to trade ex-dividend in the next four days. The ex-dividend date is usually set to be two business days before the record date, which is the cut-off date on which you must be present on the company's books as a shareholder in order to receive the dividend. The ex-dividend date is important because any transaction on a stock needs to have been settled before the record date in order to be eligible for a dividend. This means that investors who purchase ecotel communication ag's shares on or after the 30th of June will not receive the dividend, which will be paid on the 2nd of July. The company's upcoming dividend is €0.29 a share, following on from the last 12 months, when the company distributed a total of €0.29 per share to shareholders. Calculating the last year's worth of payments shows that ecotel communication ag has a trailing yield of 2.2% on the current share price of €12.90. Dividends are an important source of income to many shareholders, but the health of the business is crucial to maintaining those dividends. So we need to check whether the dividend payments are covered, and if earnings are growing. Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. Dividends are usually paid out of company profits, so if a company pays out more than it earned then its dividend is usually at greater risk of being cut. ecotel communication ag is paying out an acceptable 51% of its profit, a common payout level among most companies. Yet cash flow is typically more important than profit for assessing dividend sustainability, so we should always check if the company generated enough cash to afford its dividend. ecotel communication ag paid a dividend despite reporting negative free cash flow last year. That's typically a bad combination and - if this were more than a one-off - not sustainable. View our latest analysis for ecotel communication ag Click here to see how much of its profit ecotel communication ag paid out over the last 12 months. Stocks in companies that generate sustainable earnings growth often make the best dividend prospects, as it is easier to lift the dividend when earnings are rising. If business enters a downturn and the dividend is cut, the company could see its value fall precipitously. For this reason, we're glad to see ecotel communication ag's earnings per share have risen 20% per annum over the last five years. Many investors will assess a company's dividend performance by evaluating how much the dividend payments have changed over time. ecotel communication ag has delivered an average of 6.1% per year annual increase in its dividend, based on the past 10 years of dividend payments. We're glad to see dividends rising alongside earnings over a number of years, which may be a sign the company intends to share the growth with shareholders. From a dividend perspective, should investors buy or avoid ecotel communication ag? Earnings per share growth is a positive, and the company's payout ratio looks normal. However, we note ecotel communication ag paid out a much higher percentage of its free cash flow, which makes us uncomfortable. Overall we're not hugely bearish on the stock, but there are likely better dividend investments out there. If you're not too concerned about ecotel communication ag's ability to pay dividends, you should still be mindful of some of the other risks that this business faces. For example, we've found 3 warning signs for ecotel communication ag (1 doesn't sit too well with us!) that deserve your attention before investing in the shares. If you're in the market for strong dividend payers, we recommend checking our selection of top dividend stocks. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Bloomberg
25 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump Enters Fraught Two-Week Run as Tax, Trade Deadlines Loom
Donald Trump's frenzied second term enters a crucial stretch in the coming weeks as the president juggles a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Iran, a discordant party that he needs to pass his top legislative priority and a global economy on tenterhooks awaiting his next move on tariffs. Trump is up against a self-imposed July 4 target to pass his tax and spending bill, and he's two weeks out from the July 9 expiration of the global tariff pause that concussed the economy in April when he first introduced a raft of levies.
26 minutes ago
Lawsuit challenges billions of dollars in Trump administration funding cuts
BOSTON -- Attorneys general from more than 20 states and Washington, D.C. filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday challenging billions of dollars in funding cuts made by the Trump administration that would fund everything from crime prevention to food security to scientific research. The lawsuit filed in Boston is asking a judge to limit the Trump administration from relying on an obscure clause in the federal regulation to cut grants that don't align with its priorities. Since January, the lawsuit argues that the administration has used that clause to cancel entire programs and thousands of grants that had been previously awarded to states and grantees. 'Defendants' decision to invoke the Clause to terminate grants based on changed agency priorities is unlawful several times over,' the plaintiffs argued. 'The rulemaking history of the Clause makes plain that the (Office of Management and Budget) intended for the Clause to permit terminations in only limited circumstances and provides no support for a broad power to terminate grants on a whim based on newly identified agency priorities.' The lawsuit argues the Trump administration has used the clause for the basis of a 'slash-and-burn campaign' to cut federal grants. 'Defendants have terminated thousands of grant awards made to Plaintiffs, pulling the rug out from under the States, and taking away critical federal funding on which States and their residents rely for essential programs,' the lawsuit added. The White House's Office of Management and Budget did not immediately respond to a request made Tuesday afternoon for comment. Rhode Island Attorney General Neronha said this lawsuit was just one of several the coalition of mostly Democratic states have filed over funding cuts. For the most part, they have largely succeeded in a string of legal victories to temporarily halt cuts. This one, though, may be the broadest challenge to those funding cuts. 'It's no secret that this President has gone to great lengths to intercept federal funding to the states, but what may be lesser known is how the Trump Administration is attempting to justify their unlawful actions,' Neronha said in a statement. 'Nearly every lawsuit this coalition of Democratic attorneys general has filed against the Administration is related to its unlawful and flagrant attempts to rob Americans of basic programs and services upon which they rely. Most often, this comes in the form of illegal federal funding cuts, which the Administration attempts to justify via a so-called 'agency priorities clause." Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said the lawsuit aimed to stop funding cuts he described as indiscriminate and illegal. 'There is no 'because I don't like you' or 'because I don't feel like it anymore' defunding clause in federal law that allows the President to bypass Congress on a whim," Tong said in a statement. 'Since his first minutes in office, Trump has unilaterally defunded our police, our schools, our healthcare, and more. He can't do that, and that's why over and over again we have blocked him in court and won back our funding.' In Massachusetts, Attorney General Andrea Campbell said the U.S. Department of Agriculture terminated a $11 million agreement with the state Department of Agricultural Resources connecting hundreds of farmers to hundreds of food distribution sites while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency terminated a $1 million grant to the state Department of Public Health to reduce asthma triggers in low-income communities. 'We cannot stand idly by while this President continues to launch unprecedented, unlawful attacks on Massachusetts' residents, institutions, and economy,' Campbell said in a statement. The lawsuit argues that the OMB promulgated the use of the clause in question to justify the cuts. The clause in question, according to the lawsuit, refers to five words that say federal agents can terminate grants if the award "no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities.' 'The Trump Administration has claimed that five words in this Clause—'no longer effectuates . . . agency priorities'—provide federal agencies with virtually unfettered authority to withhold federal funding any time they no longer wish to support the programs for which Congress has appropriated funding,' the lawsuit said.
