The cliche of the moment among pundits of Latin American politics is that the region is practically frozen as it waits to see what happens in tomorrow’s U.S. presidential election between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump.
On one hand, that is patently false. Now, as always, international diplomacy continues to be pursued across the region without regard to whatever is happening up north. Over the weekend, the United Nations COP16 Biodiversity Summit wrapped up in Colombia with an agreement to include greater Indigenous participation in future negotiations. In mid-November, Peru will host about 20 Asian and Latin American leaders at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum, or APEC, summit, where Chinese investments and trade agreements will feature prominently. Days later, the G20 will meet in Brazil, where President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva will try to enlist the leaders of the world’s top economies to support his agenda focused on climate change and justice for developing economies. U.S. President Joe Biden is expected to attend both of the upcoming meetings—among his final trips before stepping down—no matter the result of the U.S. election.
Additionally, numerous domestic developments continue to unfold in countries across the region without regard for how the U.S. election will turn out. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, now one month into office, is pressing forward with a controversial judicial overhaul and energy regulations, even as violence in the states of Sinaloa and Guerrero seems to be spiking. Just last week, Bolivia saw a new controversy break out over a purported assassination attempt against former President Evo Morales and the takeover of some military barracks by his supporters, escalating the feud between Morales and his one-time political protégé, current President Luis Arce. In Venezuela, a top opposition leader was found tortured and murdered, suggesting that the targeted campaign of repression by the regime of President Nicolas Maduro will worsen as his inauguration for a new and illegitimate term in January nears.
Elsewhere political developments, though not quite as dramatic, are no less significant. Uruguay, for example, is calmly preparing for the second-round run-off in its presidential election, which will feature two pragmatic candidates who represent relatively orthodox and establishment views.
But as is often the case, there is also an element of truth to the cliche. The outcome of the U.S. election matters deeply to many of the countries in the region, starting with the economic implications. The U.S. is the main trading partner for many Central American countries, and remittances from the U.S. provide a substantial portion of each country’s GDP. While China has surpassed the U.S. as the main trading partner of many South American countries, the U.S. remains a critical market for their products, a source of tourism and remittances, and a key cultural reference point. Hundreds of thousands of migrants have made their way to the U.S. in the past year, and millions more tell pollsters that they would like to do so if they could.
A second Trump presidency would be the most alarming scenario for the region. He has threatened to implement an across-the-board tariff, even against countries with which the U.S. has free trade agreements, a measure that would heavily hit the economies of Latin America. Further, if economic analysts are correct that those proposed tariffs would lead to a spike in inflation and a potential U.S. recession, Latin America is understandably concerned. No matter how much Latin America has managed to decouple from the U.S., pivot to China and enhance intra-regional trade, it’s still true that if the U.S. catches a cold, the region gets the flu.
Beyond the policy issues and their impact, one of the factors that will most determine Washington’s future influence in Latin America will be the climate of U.S. domestic politics after the election, no matter who wins.
On migration, Trump promises a mass deportation campaign that would involve the return of what could potentially be millions of migrants to Latin America, though the logistics challenges involved in such an effort mean that the number would in all likelihood be nowhere near that high. But even at a smaller scale, the influx of people and the drop in remittances would mean political, economic and societal shocks to many of the countries in the region.
While most countries have reasons to be concerned about a second Trump presidency, however, some would welcome and even benefit from it. Leaders such as Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, Argentine President Javier Milei and former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro are ideological allies of Trump and would gain influence and potential economic benefits should he win. Other more pragmatic leaders, such as Panamanian President Jose Raul Mulino, have been preparing for a potential Trump term with tough immigration policies of their own that will endear them to the Republican leader if he wins.
None of this is to say that a Harris administration would be a panacea for Latin America, though. Harris also plans to include tariffs as part of a more protectionist trade policy than the U.S. has adopted in the post-Cold War period. Over the past four years, the Biden-Harris administration has failed to fix U.S. immigration policy and taken a haphazard approach to the border that backtracked on its campaign promises. It has also continued with deportations at relatively high numbers, amid a giant backlog of asylum cases. Getting any legislation on immigration through Congress will be a tough lift and compete with other priority items on Harris’ agenda should she win.
Given the risks—and, for the few exceptions, the opportunities—of a chaotic Trump presidency as well as the lack of clarity as to what changes a Harris presidency would bring, Latin American countries are correct to hold off on any major diplomacy that involves the United States right now. Making a big push on any regional issue only to have U.S. policy change or undermine the dynamics of the diplomacy in the coming months would amount to a wasted effort.
Beyond the policy issues and their impact, one of the factors that will most determine Washington’s future influence in Latin America will be the climate of U.S. domestic politics after the election, no matter who wins. If the country descends into a new round of disputed elections and the threat or use of political violence, it will lose some of its luster as well as its ability to claim the moral high ground compared to authoritarian countries such as China that are making inroads into the region.
On the other hand, if the U.S. can somehow move past the existential drama that has subsumed its political system in this and the 2020 election cycles and get Congress to pass legislation rather than serve as a dysfunctional barrier to effective policy, it will benefit U.S. engagement with Latin America. It will also shore up perceptions of democracy, which are struggling in many countries in the Western Hemisphere, not least the United States.
James Bosworth is the founder of Hxagon, a firm that does political risk analysis and bespoke research in emerging and frontier markets. He has two decades of experience analyzing politics, economics and security in Latin America and the Caribbean.