U.S. Army War College, and the

 Latin American and Caribbean Center,

 Florida International University 

U.S. Security Strategies: Trade Policy Implications for Latin America

Compiled by

Dr. Max G. Manwaring

Key Points: 

• Security was defi ned as “freedom from avoidable internal or external threats to a 

country’s territory, citizens, institutions, and interests.”

• Regional security, free trade, economic performance, and effective sovereignty 

are closely related.

• Instability, social violence, crime and criminal anarchy, and terrorism thrive as a 

result of poor economic performance.

• Not understanding and dealing with the linkages among these elements can 

endanger effective sovereignty, and lead a country into failing and failed state 

status.

• The cumulative negative effects of the current U.S. security and trade policy 

in the hemisphere come at a time when regional economies are in decline, and 

emphasize four highly related recommendations:

-- Advance hemispheric understanding of the nontraditional internal security 

concerns of each country, and those that the region as a whole faces.

-- Develop multilateral or bilateral civil-military structures and processes to 

identify and address threats, and fi nd mutually acceptable solutions in the 

contemporary security environment.

-- Foster expanded dialogue, consultations, and cooperation for building 

consensus principles and concepts for regional security and economic 

cooperation--and enhanced trade.

-- Go beyond training and equipping small units to fi ght narco-terrorists, and 

adapt U.S. military effi cacy to the contemporary threat environment at the 

strategic level.

• The United States shares with its Latin American neighbors an increasingly 

and vitally important fi nancial, commercial, and security/stability stake in 

the political and economic growth of the hemisphere. Any kind of politicaleconomic-security deterioration in the region will profoundly affect the health of 

the regional economies, the U.S. economy—and the concomitant power to act in 

regional and global security arenas.
2

The Summit of the Americas Center and 

Latin American and Caribbean Center of Florida 

International University, and the Strategic Studies 

Institute of the U.S. Army War College held 

the fi rst of a series of mini-conferences dealing 

with security issues in the Western Hemisphere 

in Miami, Florida, on February 26, 2004. The 

theme focused on “Security Implications of Poor 

Economic Performance in Latin America.” About 

40 business people, university faculty members, 

and military and diplomatic offi cers from the 

United States and Latin America attended. In the 

recent past, the security focus as it pertained to 

Latin America centered primarily on the Drug 

War, Colombia, and Plan Colombia. But, because 

of the hemispheric “spill-over” issues stemming 

from the Colombian crisis and the horrifi c events 

of 9/11, that set of concerns has broadened. 

The keynote presentation by Ambassador Paul 

D. Taylor, now at the U.S. Naval War College, 

and the dialogue of the panelists* and attendees 

revolved around two key issues: the linkages 

among security, the economy and trade, and 

effective sovereignty; and, the operational 

roadblocks to productive post-9/11 engagement 

in the Americas.

Linkages.

The keynote presentation, as noted above, 

defi ned security as “reasonable freedom from 

avoidable internal or external threats to a country’s 

territory, citizens, institutions, and interests.” The 

word “avoidable” was intended here to “exclude 

natural disasters (from man-made disasters).” In 

cause and effect terms, participants argued that 

poor economic performance might impact several 

factors of national and regional security interest. 

They are: 

•Support for democracy could weaken. 

•The economic suasions available to criminals 

and terrorists to undermine security operations could become more potent as the 

number of people who may be lured by drug 

traffi cking and other criminal organizations 

and guerrilla groups increase in proportion to 

economic insecurity.

•Militaries and internal security forces could 

become less capable to address threats and 

more susceptible to corruption as their 

resources become more constrained.

•Migration from poorly performing economies could be stimulated (and create serious 

burdens on host countries).

• Conversely, the war against terrorism could 

make it more diffi cult for migrants to remit 

portions of their earnings back to their 

countries of origin.

•Governments with sick economies could shift 

away from policies that encourage growth in 

trade and investment and thereby reverse the 

trend toward hemispheric integration.

•At the same time, the abandonment of 

economic integration could give rise to 

renewed tensions among countries of the 

region.

•To the extent that disappointing economic 

results in Latin America were perceived as 

the consequence of indifferent support by 

the U.S. Government or by international 

fi nancial institutions, cooperation with the 

U.S. Government on issues across the board, 

including security, could become more 

diffi cult.

In these terms, it is useful to outline the 

circular linkage among security, stability, 

development, democracy, and sovereignty. 

Security begins providing personal security to 

individual citizens. It then extends to protection 

of the collectivity from violent internal nonstate 

actors (e.g., criminals and self-appointed vigilante 

________

*The panelists included: Fernando Albareda, Commercial 

Attache, Consultate General of Peru in Miami; Edward 

Glab, Acting Director, Knight-Ridder Center for Excellence 

in Management, College of Business Administration, 

Florida International University; Francis X. “Pancho” 

Kinney, Deputy Director, Offi ce of International Affairs, 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC; 

and David Wernick, Research Director, Knight-Ridder 

Center for Excellence in Management, Florida International 

University. The Moderator was Carl A. Cira, Director, 

Summit of the Americas Center, Florida International 

University.
3

groups) and external enemies. The strategic 

security problem ends with establishing fi rm 

but fair control of the entire national territory 

and the people in it. That is, without complete 

control of the national territory, a government 

cannot provide the elements that defi ne the 

concept of “effective sovereignty”—an effective 

judicial system, rule of law, stability, longterm socioeconomic development, responsible 

democratic processes, and sustainable peace. 

The primary implication is straightforward. 

The negative results of NOT understanding and 

dealing with these linkages can lead countries 

into a downward spiral to failing and failed state 

status. 

Means to escape this box would include:

•Increased U.S. and Latin American recognition 

that hemispheric security can be threatened 

by unsatisfactory economic performance;

• Hemispheric leaders emphasizing the interconnectedness among political, economic, and 

security challenges--and the need for greater 

multilateral cooperation; and, 

•Promulgating strategic/macro-level political, 

economic, and security measures that 

strengthen economic performance and free 

trade.

Operational Roadblocks to Productive 

Engagement in the Americas.

 Conference panelists also observed that, 

in the 2-plus years since September 11, 2001, 

Congress has passed a series of sweeping new 

laws aimed at protecting the nation from another 

terrorist attack. In this connection, 

•the U.S. Department of State has instituted 

stringent new procedures for international 

travelers seeking to visit the country; 

•the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 

has stepped up inspections of passengers and 

their belongings at U.S. ports of entry; 

•the DHS has instituted new advancenotifi cation rules for importers and exporters; 

•the DHS has subjected incoming cargo to 

more frequent and rigorous screenings; and, 

•the Food and Drug Administration has issued 

new registration and reporting requirements 

for food manufacturers and importers. 

The cumulative effect of these measures has 

been a signifi cant decrease in the speed and ease 

with which people and goods enter the United 

States from Latin America. At the same time, there 

has been a signifi cant increase in the operating 

costs, transit times, and spoilage associated with 

these new measures. All this comes at a time 

when key economies in Latin America and the 

Caribbean are in decline, and nothing is being 

done to improve strategic security. 

There was also a general feeling in the 

conference that--although a clear need exists for 

regulations aimed at protecting the United States 

from terrorist activities--

•It is imperative that government offi cials work 

closely with the private sector in the United 

States to craft homeland security policies that 

are economically feasible and, to the extent 

possible, business friendly. That is, federal 

authorities need to ensure that “checkpoints 

do not become choke points.” 

•At the same time, it is also imperative that 

federal authorities consult closely with Latin 

American and Caribbean trading partners 

for the same purposes. Specifi cally, Latin 

American governments should be invited to 

comment on proposed security measures that 

will affect them. Authorities need to stress 

that the objectives are not negotiable, but 

procedures might be.

•Likewise, it would be most helpful for the 

various federal agencies involved to unify and 

integrate their activities to help expedite the 

screening of people and goods coming into 

the United States, and to reduce duplication 

of effort.

•Overall, these measures would also help in 

reducing the increasing advantages at nonU.S. ports of entry that compete for access to 

the Latin American and Caribbean markets.
4

Conclusion.

The expectations and frustrations refl ected in 

the conference dialogue stem from the general 

feeling that many of the anti-terrorism mandates 

that have been promulgated since 9/11 are more 

cosmetic than real. Essentially, the argument was 

that much remains to be done. The United States 

needs a new policy and strategy that meets the 

new threats from within the region, and moves 

from the debilitating operational procedures 

that now govern U.S.-Latin American trade 

relations to more collaborative and coherent 

strategic macro-level measures. If the United 

States continues to ignore what is happening 

with regard to its Latin American trade, the 

expansion of terrorism, the expansion of “lawless 

areas,” and the expansion of general instability 

could easily destroy the democracy, free market 

economies, and the limited prosperity that have 

been achieved in recent years. In turn, that would 

constitute a direct threat to U.S. national security 

and an indirect threat to the U.S. position in the 

world. 

*****

The views expressed in this brief are those 

of the author and do not necessarily refl ect the 

offi cial policy or position of the Department of 

the Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. 

Government. This conference brief is cleared for 

public release; distribution is unlimited.

*****

More information on the Strategic Studies 

Institute’s programs may be found on the Institute’s 

Homepage at http://www.carlisle.army.mil/ssi/ or 

by calling (717) 245-4212.