Latin America: From Insecurity to Integration

Latin America is experiencing a sharp shift to the political right. At the same time, competition between the United States and China for access to its resources and infrastructure is intensifying. The economy could thrive thanks to abundant raw materials and energy, but insecurity remains a major burden. Perhaps the solution to these enormous difficulties lies in greater regional integration, for which Europe could serve as a model. But is this even possible?

Pablo García -Berdoy: Today ‘s idea is to explore the Latin American experience and international knowledge of Rocío Martínez -Sampere and Andrea Rizzi, whom I want to introduce even though everyone knows them very well .

Rocío Martínez – Sampere was a member of the Catalan Parliament representing Barcelona for the PSC (Socialist Party of Catalonia) from 2006 to 2015. She served for over ten years as director of the Felipe González Foundation and is currently vice-president of its Board of Trustees. She holds a degree in Economics from Pompeu Fabra University and Master’s degrees in Economics and in Government and Public Policy from the London School of Economics. She also chairs the Spanish section of the Spanish – British talk shows .

Andrea Rizzi holds a law degree from Sapienza University of Rome and from the Free University of Brussels. He has been working at El He ‘s been with the newspaper since 2004, if I’m not mistaken, and is now in charge of Global Affairs and writes a weekly opinion column that we read with great enthusiasm. He’s also a member of the newspaper’s editorial board and has a weekly newsletter on geopolitics.

I wanted to start by questioning Rocío , and then establish a dialogue, about the general situation in Latin America after the recent electoral processes and in this dynamic geopolitical context. in which we find ourselves.

Rocío Martínez -Sampere: It’s a difficult question . It can be answered in layers, but if we take a broad stroke, what we are seeing is that in the last twelve elections there has been an absolute shift to right-wing governments.

Now we’ll see the second round in Brazil . But if the victory is secured… Without Flavio Bolsonaro, the continent would be left with a completely different political orientation compared to the leftist wave of a few years ago. The exceptions are Uruguay, Arévalo in Guatemala, which has elections next year, and the case of Claudia Sheinbaum in Mexico . It ‘s not a problem in general, but it is in the case of presidents like De la Espriella in Colombia or Bolsonaro himself, who are very polarizing, very schismatic. And this occurs in societies where many of their predecessors were also polarizing, and where, therefore, an institutional and democratic system is thrown into crisis.

But it’s complicated to talk about the Latin American region in general. I always joke that the Latin American homeland exists in Avianca’s advertising and little else. Because the task of regional integration is a A task that remains to be done. But for this broad overview of the entire region, let’s just say there are major issues regarding institutional frameworks and democratic strength . It’s not just the case in Latin America ; it also happens in the United States and in Europe . But in his case it may be more relevant or more dangerous, if you’ll allow me the adjective.

That would be the political aspect. As for the economic aspect, I ‘m not pessimistic about the region . Because , paradoxically, Latin America is a region perfectly prepared for the 21st century . It is a region with natural resources, especially minerals, that are needed for all new technologies . It has energy, it has water, it has food, it has a population with access to education and without conflicts – I insist that we are summarizing in a somewhat crude way – And it is a region geopolitically situated far from the world’s conflict zones . It is a strategic region for the 21st century and , therefore, economically it shouldn’t necessarily fare badly .

Who is listening to him? I suppose that will be part of our conversation . We Europeans continue to invest more than the Chinese in the region, but it wouldn’t seem that way because China invests in a more strategic way. And, especially right now, it’s very much dominated by the influence of the United States and the Trump administration, which is becoming a kind of new orange Monroe Doctrine .

With all that this implies, from Venezuela to Cuba , but also in all the countries of Central America. If Europe does not react and play the political and geopolitical role it must play , especially hand in hand with Spain, because strategically it would be the smartest thing to do and politically the most decent , all these opportunities that exist for the 21st century may once again end in frustration .

Pablo: Andrea, the brushstroke is inevitable. And besides , I think brushstrokes are always useful, don’t you? Because when you start painting a picture, the first thing you have to do is create a background . Start with your Latin American background.

Andrea Rizzi: I share Rocío’s accurate analysis . And I can perhaps add to some of those main points . First, regarding the political aspect, Rocío has pointed out this significant shift to the right. I would like to emphasize that one of the reasons I believe underlies this shift is insecurity. which is spreading across the continent . It reflects a disturbing advance of organized crime that , incidentally , could have repercussions even beyond the region, potentially affecting Europe and, specifically, Spain.

And that’s something European authorities should be paying attention to. I believe the inability of democracy in so many of these countries to address this security problem is one of the factors that explains this shift to the right, extreme in some cases, and that triggers a worrying mechanism that should give us all pause for thought, even on this side of the Atlantic.

What is it? And I think Bukele embodies it. There is a terrible problem of violence and insecurity in El Salvador . Successive governments in power in that country have failed to tackle the problem. And then, suddenly, a figure comes along promising to solve the problem through means that, to put it diplomatically, fall outside the framework of the traditional rule of law . He ends up sending multitudes of people to jail without trial, without habeas corpus, perhaps simply for having a tattoo, and ends up solving the problem to some extent .

So here we have a significant paradox that should make us reflect on certain limits to the operational capacity of democracies in our time.

And the challenge that all democrats, regardless of their political leanings, face comes from populist, extremist proposals that essentially promise, or even provide, solutions to weary, dissatisfied, and fed-up civil societies—solutions that exceed the bounds of the rule of law.

Trump is doing the same thing with illegal immigration coming precisely from Latin America. It employs a policy of near-terror with ICE on American streets and manages to prevent anyone from crossing the southern border. Is this in line with our ideals of a democratic state governed by the rule of law? I fear not, but we face a very serious challenge that should give us all pause for thought.

That’s in the political sphere . In the economic sphere, I also wanted to complement Rocío pointed this out . I think there’s a general problem of economic stagnation throughout the region.

It’s true that they have the assets I just mentioned, which allow us to view their progress with a degree of cautious optimism. But at the same time, if we look at their trajectories, almost none of these countries have been able to escape the middle-income trap, and that represents a certain erosion. I think it also takes its toll because the prospect of sustained progress is shrinking, and that generates frustrated expectations, and geopolitics comes into play within that context.

And here I also try to expand on Rocío’s arguments . We see a shift to the right, or to the extreme right, in the continent, a very clear political alignment with the United States, which promotes this doctrine . And what does this translate to? It means that the region is beginning to internalize the United States’ red lines.

lines signify that investment in certain strategic elements from other countries is not possible. The United States will not tolerate a Latin American country contracting sensitive technology from Chinese suppliers. It will not tolerate China controlling a port , whether in the Panama Canal, in Peru, or elsewhere. They are learning to navigate this new red line and this alignment with the United States and other actors, including the Europeans. We must recalibrate our relationship in light of this new reality.

Rocío: I think Andrea has pointed out two things that are very interesting and very important for the region, for its present and for its future. The first is the Bukele phenomenon . Just yesterday I was talking about Guatemala, which will have elections in a year, and I was told about Neto Bran, who is the king of TikTok, who dresses up as Iron Man, who is gaining incredible popularity in a short time and who wants to be the Bukele of Guatemala .

One of the things that surprised me most in the region, and this isn’t new , but has been going on for some years now, is that people there say: “No , well, but Bukele has achieved something very important, because the issue of insecurity is key and it also runs longitudinally across the entire continent, all the way to Chile . ”

But Bukele didn’t campaign or win the presidency on the issue of insecurity. That came two and a half years later. He won the election fighting corruption.

And for three years he didn’t make security an issue . Until this phenomenon began. which has the region quite fascinated, right? It’s not easy to do that in a country more complex than El Salvador, to focus on a single issue, even if it’s insecurity. Milei tried it in Argentina and it’s not working for him. I think this revolution of candidates that we’re seeing in almost every country has to do with communication . And that ‘s going to shape many political campaigns and many of the candidates’ personalities.

It will not be so easy for the Bukele phenomenon, in the strict political sense, with the issue of insecurity, to be reproduced in other countries, which could generate a new wave of dissatisfaction and frustration.

That’s it That remains to be seen . Because , although I know what I’m saying is very boring , in the end, when politicians come and go, all that’s left are the institutions. I would like to see insecurity combated, because that’s at the root of… Any citizen’s well-being . If you don’t feel safe, we can’t talk about anything else. It’s the main thing. It’s at the base of the pyramid. Feeling free to go out on the street, for your children to go to school. That’s the foundation of everything. And I think we have many examples where this has been achieved while respecting the rule of law and basic human rights conventions .

But, I insist, the region isn’t headed in that direction. It wants Bukeles, but it’s not so clear that even transferring Bukele himself to another country— one that ‘s larger, more complex, more fragmented in its issues, its populations, and its territorial cohesion—would yield the same result.

And on the economic front , I completely agree with you . It has the right conditions, given everything we’ve discussed, and then there’s the absolute offshoring from the United States . We’re trading efficiency for security in our economic networks. But it’s true that if this doesn’t ultimately reach the middle class in the form of growth—and in many countries this is being questioned—then it won’t end up being very useful .

In other words, insecurity must be combated effectively but fairly. And economic growth must have a per capita outcome that allows people to have greater well-being . These are the two major questions facing the region today .

Pablo: I would like to connect your interventions with two thoughts that are not contradictory but are not coincident .

The first is that we can think that political evolution in Latin America is indigenous. That is, there is an indigenous element that is unique . That does not have such a direct relationship with the geopolitical issues that have been superimposed on the dynamics of, for example, the issue of security .

However, the economic element, even more so than the geopolitical element of Trump II, is something that has been brewing for many years . And it is fundamentally geo-economic. And here’s a thought I’d like to share with you, which is much broader. That is, when you analyze the evolution of countries Less developed, you realize that the only way to get out of lower states of development is through industrialization .

In other words, it is very difficult for countries that export raw materials, with few exceptions, to develop middle and more urbanized, developed classes without underlying industrialization. And now we find that industrialization is concentrated primarily in a single country that monopolizes the production of manufactured goods to such an extent that it accounts for over 40 percent of the world’s manufacturing output.

And I’m referring to China . Europe is experiencing deindustrialization, but so has the United States . China is highly competitive , and I won’t get into whether its advantages are legitimate or illegitimate. Do n’t you think that in this global debate about the economic situation in Latin America, the word ” China ” needs to be very present, but not always focusing on Chinese investment in Latin America, but rather on the almost historical shift in industrial production that is taking place in favor of China ?

Andrea: Yes, I think it’s a fundamental issue. I completely agree. I believe China is having a concentrating effect on global manufacturing production, which is deeply detrimental to countries trying to escape the middle-income trap I mentioned earlier. I agree with this assessment . It ‘s a difficult problem to solve because, unfortunately, China has an extraordinary capacity to withstand external pressure.

We Europeans, with our incomparably more prosperous domestic market and greater negotiating power compared to Latin America, struggle to defend ourselves against this competition. This competition stems in part from admirable elements such as the planning capacity, effort, and talent of Chinese society . However, it also has a deeply questionable aspect, including subsidies, below-market credit financing, and monetary manipulation, which also benefits Chinese exports. With a society experiencing depressed domestic consumption and no qualms about exporting at dumping prices to annihilate others—those who already have an industrial structure, as is the case in Europe, or those who could develop and become competitors, as could be certain Latin American countries or others— we Europeans, with better conditions to resist, face difficulties . Latin America , unfortunately, I believe, is in an even more asymmetrical situation .

China has many tools at its disposal, including its skillfully acquired control of strategic raw materials and many other elements that make the fight complicated. Therefore, the path for Latin America toward a new and sustained road of progress that allows more people to join the middle class in a stable, lasting, and peaceful way appears quite difficult . Because raw materials can help sustain, can keep things afloat. But I agree with you, Pablo, that it is not usually a recipe that generates mature, prosperous and stable societies.

And then I’d like to introduce another element, in case we want to elaborate on it. I believe that Latin America would greatly benefit from progress in its own internal integration. Of course, there are mechanisms . Obviously, we have Mercosur, which, moreover, has finally signed an agreement with the European Union, and we hope that it can develop to its full potential.

But I believe the region would have a huge interest in making progress in some areas of greater integration. We can’t be naive. We can’t think they’re going to create a European Union in the next decade. This isn’t viable or even conceivable, but there may be greater cooperation that would allow them to weather the storm of this world of unchecked predators like China in manufacturing or the United States in other areas.

To confront and withstand it better, with greater negotiating power. Unfortunately, my feeling is that, although there is an extraordinary ideological convergence, all to the right , I don’t foresee credible premises for a significant process of increased integration to occur.

They are sovereignist right- wingers , I fear, more interested in certain types of cultural battles, in certain types of economic actions with a national focus, not so willing to give up that minimum concession of sovereignty that translates into our ordinary progress in the capacity to protect common interests, which is the European experiment.

I don’t see them there, and I think that’s a burden. And it’s a problem because if they were able to do so in the next two or three five-year periods, they would be better positioned to thrive in this brutal, extractive world, with Trump coming in to extract Venezuela’s oil and with China stifling any possibility of manufacturing development, as you rightly point out , Pablo .

Pablo: What do you think, Rocío?

Rocío: Well, I’m very interested in what Andrea just said, because I basically agree . But let me raise a few questions I have. I’m not an expert, but I understand that China’s interventionist industrial policy model , with its rural-to-urban migration and heavy public investment—the model that has made them the world’s leading producers—is entering a phase of exhaustion.

That doesn’t mean at all that the Chinese economy is going to collapse. That’s not the case. It doesn’t mean they’re reversing all their strategic investment positions, either in Africa or Latin America. No. But it does mean that the model is showing signs of exhaustion and that, therefore, another economic path is opening up…

A former editor of El País América once told me something I always repeat because I think it’s brilliant : the difference between Spain and Latin America is that Spain has known how to build a state but hasn’t known how to build a nation. Latin America has known how to build a nation but hasn’t known how to build a state. I think it’s a brilliant statement that sums up the fact that there are many infrastructures of all kinds—not just road or rail infrastructure , but all kinds of infrastructure—that are lacking in the region and that could be a catalyst for many things.

Because today, the definition of what constitutes the primary, secondary, and tertiary sectors in economics has much more porous, blurred boundaries . And fundamentally, it’s due to the synergies that existed in economies from a longer time ago , before the technological revolution . Therefore, I still believe that economically, despite all the difficulties we’ve discussed, the region has an economic opportunity . Also because, I insist, there’s a change we all learned, and we learned it in a very painful way, with the pandemic: there’s a change in your distribution and production networks . And in this sense, Latin America is a region close to a superpower, the United States, which will continue to be so, as will China. Therefore, production lines can be chosen based on proximity and because, I reiterate, we’ve shifted from mere price efficiency to economic security.

The challenges are many. Andrea mentioned one, which is regional integration. This has always been an unresolved issue . Like you, I’m not very optimistic . When you talk to people from the region , they know how important a certain level of integration would be, and therefore, ceding sovereignty as we did here, where European integration has become independent of political differences . A Spanish social democrat might get along better with a German center-right person than with an English Labour member when it comes to integration. The logic of integration is vertical. Ideological logic is horizontal . And you can act in both dimensions .

And I think Europe has understood this well. And Latin America hasn’t wanted to understand it. Many times they say horrible things to me . They say: ” You were able to do it because you had a war, you had the trauma of a war .” And I always answer them : ” Are you telling me that you need a trauma to do something you want to do and know you have to do ?”

It ‘s the argument that you have to suffer. That phrase that a PP minister also used : “The worse, the better .” No: the worse, the worse.

In other words, we’re going to try to improve little by little, but effectively. Economically, integration would be a perimeter, as it is for European countries . It would be a perimeter of legal security, of economic credibility, that could allow them to take advantage not only of all the assets they have, but also of the loopholes that I believe the new Five -Year Plan will leave , if we want to talk in these terms about the Chinese economy .

Pablo: For me, Mexico is the most important country from that perspective, because it has every opportunity to develop new economic activity in the wake of its northern neighbor’s power. In fact, we are already seeing it.

We see their growth figures and their way of developing an industrialized economy with great success in some sectors. And yet, there are problems of order, of institutional security, that remain, and There does not appear to be a breakthrough towards a higher stage of third partner of that economic bloc that already seems to be dissolving, or has already dissolved, with Canada and the United States . And to have a more social and political situation , I don’t say stable, which is a word I like less and less every day because it can denote many unpleasant things, but prosperous and inclusive.

I wanted to ask you how you see the Mexican case in particular, with that power it has, that talent it also has, but at the same time with those enormous deficits that make the country a country that is still very fragile .

Andrea: And I would say that the political balance of Sheinbaum ‘s administration so far can be considered relatively positive in handling the storms coming from north of the Rio Grande. She has shown a certain pragmatism in weathering this complicated situation with relatively minor damage. I think this can be considered a positive development.

But given the difficulty of the situation , I nevertheless agree with you. I think the overall picture for Mexico is very disappointing . It is a country still riddled with a staggering plague of insecurity for which there is no cure or antidote. And it is a country still unfortunately marked by certain populist traits in AMLO’s policies, which I also consider misguided in various respects.

For example, in the area of justice reform . We’ve talked here about legal certainty. I believe that the justice reform that AMLO promoted at the end of his term was not positive for Mexico, and I think that Sheinbaum, in a certain sense, continues to be AMLO’s hostage, although publicly he maintains a very discreet, not particularly visible or audible position . I sense, understand, and observe that he still wields a certain political influence over the structure, over the people, and so on, and that he still somehow conditions Sheinbaum.

The overall picture is clearly unsatisfactory . It is a country that, although it may show some signs of economic growth, is actually underperforming.

It’s a society with enormous potential, which, for various reasons, fails to fully realize it. And unfortunately, I don’t see them anywhere near making a leap towards a different kind of politics—one that’s more efficient, more pragmatic, more productive. So, I see them very busy navigating the difficult waves coming from the north.

I see them as quite lost when it comes to confronting the scourge of crime and violence that has plagued them for decades. And my assessment is, let’s say, a sadness at not seeing the potential of this people, admirable in many ways, being fully realized.

Pablo: What do you think, Rocío?

Rocío: Well, talking about Mexico is like talking about Brazil. They’re practically two continents in themselves. We ‘d almost need a whole session dedicated to Mexico. But I think Andrea has summarized it very well. It’s also a country I feel very close to; I love it, it’s wonderful in many ways . It has many opportunities, but it’s struggling . And its growth prospects—I don’t know the details—but the estimated GDP growth for next year certainly won’t reach 2%.

And with the opportunities it has, it should be much better off. Furthermore, it suffers from the scourge of violence and crime, which are not improving, but worsening , and are very… crusades against drug trafficking.

It ‘s one of the main problems . And although it doesn’t affect all areas of Mexico equally , it’s very significant. Then there’s also a problem of governance, of government. You mentioned the justice reform, but it’s not just that. Let’s remember the headlines that asked if Was Sheinbaum going to be a loyal vicar of AMLO or not ?

It ‘s true that President Sheinbaum is trying to change course, but it’s also true that this change of course could cost her dearly in terms of internal cohesion within Morena . And we’ll see what happens. Because, of course, if you trade autonomy for instability , well, those are just formulas. In life, you never really get a choice. I wish elections were a matter of good versus evil.

But as she becomes able to, let’s say, detach herself from AMLO’s influence, it’s also true that AMLO, and all of AMLO’s people, could cause problems for the internal stability of the party and the governors in Mexico. It is a huge country with a large institutional and political structure.

Economically , what has also happened is that the situation of extremely vulnerable people living in poverty and exclusion has improved in recent years under broad-based governments. In Mexico, the wealthiest have also improved . But it is the middle classes who have been pressured both socially and economically .

And this is very difficult to sustain . As long as the middle class doesn’t steadily improve, it’s very difficult to create a sustained economic growth. And I believe that’s partly what has happened in Mexico, which, moreover, hasn’t implemented any structural reforms since almost the 1990s .

There is a paralysis of structural reform. This isn’t just happening in Mexico; it’s happening in many European countries as well . The 2008 financial crisis paralyzed them even further, despite the rhetoric to the contrary. And that suggests that Mexico, I insist, is like having a child who has everything in their favor to study and succeed in life. And he tells me : “No, but I passed, Mom . ” Yes, well, you passed, but you should have gotten top marks, because you’re starting from a position that should allow you to do better, not just barely manage.

Pablo: When we talk about European integration, I always remember Alan ‘s book Milward, The European Rescue of the Nation State . That attractive , yet counterintuitive, thesis that the Founding Fathers, in essence , because they needed to implement much more proactive public policies after the Second World War, required the mechanism of integration, starting with coal and steel, to make those public policies possible, because separately they had neither the means to control the Rhine coal, nor the means to express their economic capacity without a common market, and so on.

And the question that arises is whether the creation or weakness of the state in Latin America—the point where they all converge—might be the reason, rather than war, for integration. In other words, we are very weak states and we need to integrate to address our weaknesses, especially in security. And therein lies a very delicate issue : how can Mexico emerge from the conundrum of insecurity when you have a large market to the north or across the Atlantic, yet your security forces or institutions alone lack the capacity to compete with that challenge?

No I know. You remember very well the internationalization or delegation of the issue of security in Colombia , or other issues that have occurred throughout history, which have not worked well either .

“When talking about European integration (…) after World War II, they needed the mechanism of integration, starting with coal and steel, to make those public policies possible.”
Pablo García Berdoy

Rocío: You said it yourself, I think it’s the phrase I mentioned earlier that this director of El País told me , that they haven’t built a state, but they have built a nation, and that’s why integration is such a complicated issue . Because it implies ceding sovereignty. It ‘s an extremely complicated issue in the region . That’s why integration hasn’t progressed, even thematically, because it’s clear that when you have supranational integration, it allows you to do things that would be more complex if your only perimeter were national , more schismatic , more short-sighted . And even more so with the polarization we’re seeing now. throughout the Western world . Therefore, integration is a solution. But let’s be realistic, I don’t see it happening. I hope I’m wrong .

So, can we solve the problem of insecurity?

When I see all these people saying they’re going to solve complex problems with a recipe and in a day … This is not going to happen, but it is possible to begin to instill discipline with a serious commitment from governments that continue to have compact instruments of power, necessary and with the necessary people. You can’t solve insecurity in two days, or even two years, but you can begin to control it. And when you start to control it , the same thing happens as with corruption: you’re not going to end kleptocracies overnight , but you can begin to control it and, therefore, have a horizon for solving these problems.

Pablo: Why haven’t we thought in a thoughtful and proactive way that one of the multilateral organizations that is really needed, with resources and good governance in Latin America, is a continental security organization ? Even with the United States . What do you think?

Andrea: I think that’s absolutely right. Because clearly the problem is becoming increasingly transnational . Gangs are establishing operational bases in new places . Cities that weren’t particularly dangerous before are suddenly becoming hyper – violent . And there’s clearly a regional dimension that desperately needs police cooperation to address this issue.

So I think you’ve hit a crucial note. Now, I think, without being an expert, that it is nevertheless possible I suggest that this problem be addressed from a two-speed perspective. The first is the one you point out, which has to do with greater efficiency in police action, which necessarily also involves a better transnational operation, which ideally should be on a regional basis.

There are global organizations . But Interpol isn’t the same; it won’t be as effective. It needs to be on a regional basis. Now, I believe that the response to the problem of insecurity and crime in the Latin American region also requires a response in terms of progress, social cohesion, education, systems, cultures, and, of course, as we’ve mentioned several times, general institutional effectiveness . Because it’s clear to us that these organizations thrive not only because of specific failures in security systems , but also because of a general breeding ground of difficulties in which organized crime can thrive.

And integration is also key to the response . Because integration is also crucial for them to achieve a leap in prosperity, in the sense I mentioned earlier, as the ability to negotiate with these major predators . But also because of the practical benefits of being a shared reality.

We see it in Europe. If we could complete the common market, that alone would give us many assets. The Americans too . And that progress would help drain the pond where crime thrives.

Pablo: What does Rocío think ?

Rocío: And I completely agree. That is, first, insecurity. And in the long term , more prosperity. The European Union of today was founded, like the European Coal and Steel Communities , on two major issues that had led us to a deadly and devastating confrontation for all Europeans. And so these issues were taken out of the equation . They were eliminated. Well, in America, one could consider two other issues. I believe the other should be energy, but I understand that national interests there would be extremely complicated.

But you could create an American community focused on security and other topics, right ? I agree with the vision Andrea is proposing. The horizon, what it should be, and we have said so, is an integration that allows for prosperity, because otherwise, these problems have no sustainable solution over time.

But we can start with an American community focused on security. Where do we draw the line? Because if it enters the United States, I don’t think anyone would take it seriously . It has to be an independent proposal from the countries of the region. Therefore, I would limit it to Mexico, but that’s extremely complicated: where would the headquarters be, who would be in charge…

But it would be a way to start. A seed for future integration. Why not? That’s how we started in Europe.

Pablo: We have five minutes. I’d like to talk about Europe because we haven’t talked about Europe . So, what role can we play?

Andrea: Well, I think we can play a role. In two senses. One is trying to We must seize this moment, given US interventionism and the difficulties it poses for certain Chinese investments. We must position ourselves as a partner that transcends the logic of predation —a reliable, long-term partner already strongly present in the region, even if sometimes less noticeable than China’s presence or, more recently, the much-discussed presence of the United States . Our aim is to consolidate our position as a reliable, non-intrusive, long-term economic partner.

And this makes perfect sense. We’ve done something with Mercosur, but I think there are other areas for investment. For example, in the capital finance sector, CAF, the Development Bank of Latin America and the Caribbean, could perhaps be strengthened. And perhaps Europe could consider some form of cooperation with CAF and then, briefly, something more geopolitical.

In a world where international law is under threat , I believe it is in the best interest of both Latin Americans and Europeans to defend and uphold frameworks of international institutions and shared norms. This is an area where we can and should collaborate. Europeans must seek common ground with Latin America, even though ideologically some may be somewhat distant . But this interest is shared.

Rocío: And I completely agree. Economically, it makes perfect sense. And Mercosur, yes, but it took us 26 years to establish it. This is unacceptable . Especially since a political and institutional alliance with Latin America is beneficial to Europe, as it is with Canada, but even more so with Latin America. To situate ourselves in this new geopolitical disorder in which we will live in the coming years .

To do that, let’s stop saying we want to be a bridge and start crossing once and for all, please.

If we were to take all the statements made by the last two Spanish presidents, Mariano Rajoy and Pedro Sánchez, and all the foreign policy actions they’ve taken, well, it’s clear that Latin America is not a priority . And Europe has to be dragged along by Spain.

Pablo: Ultimately, we lack concrete actions. Therefore, I invite you to another UNO podcast to discuss Spain and Latin America. Because this conversation is now inevitable after so much neglect .