Follow us on social

google cta
US general wants 'Marshall Plan' to counter China in LatAm

US general wants 'Marshall Plan' to counter China in LatAm

SOUTHCOM commander raises good questions but should they be coming from the military?

Analysis | Latin America
google cta
google cta

A top U.S. military general wants a "Marshall Plan" for Latin America but is likely more concerned about China's encroachment into America's backyard with "dual use" infrastructure than about what poor people in the Global South actually need.

But then again, Gen. Laura Richardson, SOUTHCOM commander, is a military officer, not a diplomat or humanitarian program lead at USAID.

Richardson told an audience at the Aspen Security Forum last week that the U.S. has been MIA in the region while Russia and especially China has been exploiting the post-COVID economic downturn with both military outreach (Russia recently in Cuba) and development projects (Beijing's Belt and Road). That is why Washington needs to offer its own "Marshall Plan" to Latin America, which it views as it its own sphere of influence.

She said 22 of the 31 countries in the region have signed on to the Belt and Road development program.

“How are we competing Team USA and Team Democracy with the tenders that are coming out from [other] countries? How are we getting our U.S. quality investment and talking about our U.S. companies investing in the region? We have a lot of companies in the region. I don’t think we’re branding Team USA as we should. It should be better. We’ve got to be bragging about what U.S. quality investment does,” she said.

The Marshall Plan, proposed by Secretary of State George C. Marshall in a speech at Harvard University in 1947, was launched by President Harry S. Truman in 1948 to help Europe rebuild after World War II. The plan provided $13.3 billion in aid to 16 countries through 1951, about $150 billion in today's dollars.

“I really believe that economic security and national security are going hand-in-hand here in this hemisphere,” she said.

Security of course, is the optimal word here. "If (Belt and Road is) for doing good in the hemisphere, then I’m all for it. But it makes me a little suspicious when it’s in the critical infrastructure … deep water ports, 5G, cybersecurity, energy, space … I worry about the dual use nature of that,” Richardson said.

“These are state-owned enterprises by a communist government and I’m worried about the flipping of that to a military application very quickly if something were to happen, maybe in the Indo-Pacom region,” she said.

Therein lies the crux of the situation. On one hand she is absolutely right. As in Africa, Global South countries are reacting to economic outreach from China and Russia because a) they need it and America (private nor public) isn't in the game and b) help from China and Russia doesn't appear to come with as many strings as U.S. assistance might demand. She may also be on point that there are a dearth of high-level visits and attention to the region, giving the very real impression that Latin America is an afterthought.

But we should also ask why the military is taking the lead on asking the real questions here. Where are the diplomats? Is this just another argument for putting more military eyes and assets in the region?

Richardson is right to raise the issue: it is past time that Washington stop whining about China's influence and apply some elbow grease to nurturing productive relations with its neighbors that aren't just about military or political ideological influence. In other words, a two-way street, that if paved well, will mean security and prosperity for everyone. But we should also ask why the military is taking the lead on asking the real questions here, and who, in the end will be providing the answers.


Gen. Laura Richardson, the commander of Southern Command, speaks at an Atlantic Council event on March 19, 2024. (Screengrab via atlanticcouncil.org)
Gen. Laura Richardson, the commander of Southern Command, speaks at an Atlantic Council event on March 19, 2024. (Screengrab via atlanticcouncil.org)
google cta
Analysis | Latin America
Trump Iran war
Top image credit: Carlos119 via shutterstock.com/Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Thomas Hudner (DDG 116) fires a Tomahawk land attack missile in support of Operation Epic Fury, Mar. 1, 2026. (U.S. Navy photo)

The cost of Trump's Iran war: $5 billion and counting

QiOSK

A new report has found that President Trump’s illegal and unprovoked war against Iran has now cost American taxpayers upwards of $5 billion and counting.

Citing costs associated with Trump’s attack on Iran last June, as well as American-led strikes on Houthi rebels in Yemen as part of Israel’s war on Gaza, in addition to regional buildup costs and the tab for lost military equipment so far, the report, published by the Center for American Progress, concludes that “a conservative estimate for the initial costs of Operation Epic Fury is more than $5 billion as of March 2 — and the campaign is just getting started.”

keep readingShow less
Hegseth Caine Pentagon
Top photo credit: U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine hold a briefing amid the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran, at the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 2, 2026. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz

‘Un-American’ critics of war represent the majority of Americans

Washington Politics

“Absolutely disgusting and evil.”

This is how Tucker Carlson reportedly described the Trump administration’s decision to strike Iran. Carlson would add, "This is going to shuffle the deck in a profound way."

keep readingShow less
UK reform party israel
Top photo credit: London, UK. September 7th 2025. Labour and Conservative parties send representatives to lead Antisemitism march. (shuttertock/Brian Minkoff)

Europe's weakness on Iran, Gaza has radicalized politics at home

Middle East

By their shameful, spineless stance on the U.S. and Israeli war against Iran, European leaders have doomed whatever remained of their global influence and their pretensions to promote a “rules-based international order.”

They are also helping to dig the graves of their own political parties, and quite possibly of European democracy.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.