In May 2026, the RAND Corporation organization from the USA (undesirable in Russia), released another report on the Western Hemisphere. It is called “Force Multipliers in the Americas. Harnessing Security Force Assistance to Bolster Homeland Defense and U.S. Strategic Objectives in Latin America” and contains recommendations on how Washington can strengthen its power in the region.
RAND is known for developing all kinds of scenarios on behalf of law enforcement agencies, Department of War, etc. which are then used to make decisions in foreign policy. And in the research itself there is a reference to the imperatives of national security. So this time, it is said that “Latin America presents the United States with both promising opportunities and notable challenges. By employing security force assistance (SFA) in new and innovative ways or by expanding its current use, the United States can magnify these opportunities and mitigate existing challenges. Importantly, these outcomes can be achieved at a relatively modest cost, making SFA a valuable tool for advancing U.S. interests in Latin America”.
Next, the authors describe possible ways to use the full potential of the US Military’s Strategic Command in Latin America to counter threats within the country, strengthen partnerships, and expand US strategic influence in the region. As the case of the operation against the Venezuelan leadership at the beginning of the year showed, the United States uses threat narratives to justify its interference in the affairs of other countries. In addition, similar to other reports and the current trend in the geopolitical planning of the US establishment, the interests of Russia, China and Iran in the region are listed among the threats. Russia is mentioned 74 times in the report, while China is mentioned 115 times. All three countries are designated as Adversarial States.
The authors noted that “Moscow continues to invest political, economic, and military capital in the region to project power, challenge U.S. influence, and build an anti-Western constituency for a multipolar world order. The Kremlin’s attention centers on Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, and, to a lesser extent, Brazil.” To put it mildly, if we make a comparison with investments from the EU and the United States in the region, then the level of Russian investments looks so meager that this statement looks like it is deliberately distorted for political purposes. The US sanctions simply do not allow Moscow to work with the countries of the region. Therefore, targeted cooperation, largely of a humanitarian nature, as with Cuba, can have little effect on limiting the capabilities of the United States. As for multipolarity, this course has been declared by a number of states, regardless of Russia’s desires and efforts. Thus, during Hugo Chavez’s first term as president, Venezuela independently announced a multipolarity strategy, since it sees this process as organically inherent in decolonization as such.
The authors also try to link the activity of various criminal groups in the region with the political interests and regimes of a number of countries in order to label them, demonize them, and designate them as legitimate targets for intervention. This is a rather old method, which is practiced by the US State Department, Pentagon, CIA and FBI. However, it did not lead to a decrease in crime in Latin American countries, where the United States imposed its “security” programs, as can be seen from the example of Colombia, Ecuador and Mexico. Conversely, when local authorities began to solve problems themselves, it turned out, as it was during the presidential term of Rafael Correa in Ecuador and Cuba’s assistance to the Colombian government in the negotiation process with rebel groups.
The report draws a number of conclusions that indicate that the United States is inclined not to the diplomatic process, but to the use of military force, which, against the background of Donald Trump’s constant threats against some countries, raises serious concerns about the possibility of new conflicts provoked by Washington.
Thus, the document says that by using the capabilities of reconnaissance and strike formations in a new way, using innovative approaches, or expanding their current use, the United States can take advantage of the opportunities opening up in Latin America and mitigate existing problems Noted that the results of the use of reconnaissance and strike formations can be achieved at relatively low cost, which makes them a valuable tool for advancing US interests in Latin America.
It is openly stated that the Pentagon can use the full range of available forces and capabilities. “In addition to other instruments of national power, DOW SFA capabilities can be used to address a wide spectrum of problem sets across multiple strategic environments, ranging from competition to irregular warfare to crisis… DOW could use the Army Security Cooperation Group—South (formerly known as the 1st Security Force Assistance Brigade), special operation forces, and the National Guard State Partnership Program to reinforce each other’s activities to reduce the corruption that underpins the illicit trafficking in drugs and, in some cases, the advancement of Chinese interests in Latin American countries.”
Most importantly, it says that “General security cooperation authorities are largely sufficient for the conduct of SFA activities, but these authorities are not designed with the purpose of countering economic coercion in partner nations, which is the prevailing method through which China projects power in Latin America. Accordingly, DOW may want to give more consideration to how it can contribute to meeting these challenges.”
That is, in fact, the United States can at any time conduct some kind of military operation under a false pretext. However, it is more difficult for them to act through economic tools, so a more sophisticated approach is needed to prevent countries from cooperating with States in other regions like China and Russia. This implies a de-dollarization strategy that has been consistently applied by some countries, including through the New Development Bank of BRICS. Washington is reacting nervously to the move away from using the dollar in international settlements, and earlier Donald Trump threatened to impose tariff sanctions on those states that would switch to alternative payment mechanisms. At the same time, as Brazil’s experience has shown after the introduction of protectionist tariffs, the United States is more dependent on the supply of products from this country, and therefore large exceptions have been made.
The situation around Iran also forces the White House to pursue a more restrained policy, as emotional decisions, especially in the field of the use of military force, on the eve of the US congressional elections undermine the positions of the Republican Party. However, it should be borne in mind that the RAND report is advisory in nature, it will be reflected on for some time in the corridors of US power, synchronized with similar analytics from other centers, and then, possibly, introduced into strategic plans. Therefore, the proposed models will be implemented after a certain time.
Comments