Interesting editorial from Financial Times on US-China competition in Latin America. A few thoughts:

1. Southcom is the key US agency in LatAm, and that's a problem. Militarization encourages zero-sum 'backyard' mentality. This irritates many in the region and leads to bad diagnosis. Not every Chinese mine, port or factory in LatAm is a strategic defeat for the US.

2. Almost no evidence of nearshoring happening outside Mexico, for good reason. Bad infrastructure, high costs, long distances. New trade agreements w/ LatAm unlikely given US industrial protectionism + agricultural subsidies.

3. Even in Mexico, NAFTA/USMCA has had mixed results at best. Boom of FDI, exports to US and industrialisation but limited impact on growth, poverty, inequality, informality (not to mention security). Nearshoring is not a silver bullet.

4. FT asks 'where are the concessional US loans or the American 5G suppliers?'. This is key, US private capital won't be 'mobilized' without cheap finance and risk-sharing from the gov. DFCgov is a step in the right direction but should expand its portfolio

DFCgov 5. Don't exagerate China's 'success' in LatAm. Many projects failed, others cost too much $ and hurt China's reputation. And China's approach has changed a lot in 20 years! More on April 11 in this great The Inter-American Dialogue
and Conselho Empresarial Brasil-China (CEBC) event thedialogue.org/events/online-…