USA: Ideology and Foreign Policy

It is no secret that a country’s foreign policy is shaped by the dominant ideology of the ruling group, the party, or the leading organization guided by specific ideas and often doctrinaire principles.

However, for quite some time now, humanity has come to understand — at least in theory — that the best, most prudent, and viable diplomacy is one that respects the ideology of others. Without abandoning one’s own principles, civilized engagement must be the path forward.

Yet, in another display of the prevailing global disorder, the United States government has disregarded this principle and acts on the belief that other nations must align unconditionally with its own far-right ideology.

"You either think and act according to my beliefs, or you will face consequences" seems to be the paradigm of the Trump administration. This is not entirely new, but what is different now is the stark, unapologetic nature of its execution. Even trade-related sanctions, such as the current wave of tariffs, are being justified by the occupant of the White House using strictly political and ideological arguments.

Of course, for Cuba, this has always been the case. The imperialist elite’s rejection of the Cuban Revolution — and more so, the example it represents — has been the sole justification for sustaining the longest economic war in modern history.

This attitude of overwhelming arrogance is now affecting other Latin American nations, intruding on the bilateral relations between the United States and countries such as Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico.

Predictably, the usual cast of political actors has emerged — the proverbial bulls in a china shop — including congressional figures Carlos Giménez, Mario Díaz-Balart, and, of course, Representative María Elvira Salazar, whom the author describes as intellectually limited. All are directed by Mr. Rubio, the leading figure of imperial foreign policy, with his sights set firmly on Havana.

It is readily apparent that the governments targeted for harassment, destabilization, and potential overthrow share common positions — progressive platforms, anti-Zionist stances, unwavering solidarity with Cuba, and a strong belief in national sovereignty as an inalienable right.

The most recent case is Brazil. It is well known that Brazilian justice — which no one in their right mind would characterize as leftist, not even President Lula himself — decided to prosecute former President Jair Bolsonaro. Furthermore, as part of Brazil’s normal leadership rotation, Lula hosted the latest BRICS summit.

That alone was enough to trigger an irate response from the U.S. president, who, spurred on by Secretary Rubio, launched a tariff war against Brazil — a classic case of shooting oneself in the foot. According to experts interviewed by CNN, Brazil is well positioned to endure the excessive attack.

Much can be said about this newly fabricated conflict. A central question, however, makes the situation even more inexplicable: if the United States enjoys a trade surplus of more than 400 billion dollars, what is the commercial justification for such actions? Quite simply, there is none.

Colombia, for its part, has been caught up in a scheme to remove President Gustavo Petro from the Casa de Nariño, the official seat of government, as though he had not been duly elected by the Colombian people through legitimate democratic means.

Colombian politics is notoriously complex, marked by over 60 years of political violence and the simultaneous operation of multiple forms of conflict, including insurgency and the transnational reach of narcotrafficking.

Amid this volatile environment, figures like Giménez, Díaz-Balart, and Salazar have involved themselves directly. According to leaked audio published by the Spanish newspaper El País, their participation in a plan to stage a coup against the Colombian president is made explicitly clear. Petro’s principal offense appears to be his advocacy for justice, both domestically and in his firm condemnation of the genocide in Palestine.

Attacks have also been directed against Mexico, a country that, from the start of the MAGA administration, has been subjected to threats, erratic diplomacy, and incoherent declarations from Mr. Rubio — who can barely tolerate the progressive leadership south of the Rio Grande.

Historic and complex issues such as drug trafficking and migration flows are now manipulated and exaggerated in collusion with Mexico’s far-right opposition. These actors have failed to reconcile with the fact that two successive progressive governments have come to power with platforms rooted in sovereignty and national independence.

In the midst of this confusion, the anti-Cuban agenda of the aforementioned lawmakers has extended its focus to PEMEX — the same state oil company nationalized by President Lázaro Cárdenas as a matter of Mexico’s sovereign right to control its resources.

A barrage of accusations and pressure tactics have followed, all aimed at forcing PEMEX to cut legitimate commercial ties with Cuba.

To antagonize Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia simultaneously is, at minimum, a colossal miscalculation. Combined, the economies of these three countries represent 73.2 percent (2024) of the total GDP of Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as 60.2 percent of the region’s total population.

When analyzing the core differences between the aggressor and the countries under attack, the contrast becomes clear. The targeted governments demand respect for national independence, promote agendas aimed at improving the living conditions of their people, and assert the right to freely choose their trading partners and regional alliances.

In short, what Lula, Petro, or Claudia Sheinbaum stand for is fundamentally opposed to the outdated doctrine of far-right imperialism and the historical views held by Mr. Rubio and the lawmakers involved in these reprehensible actions. It is a form of confrontational ideology stripped of diplomatic decorum.

Mr. Rubio should understand that nothing good can come from a foreign policy so ideologically tainted. Regardless of whether a specific decision was made by President Trump himself, it is Rubio’s duty to correct anything that harms his country. Of course, that requires courage and political will — traits rarely found in authoritarian, imperialist approaches rooted in arrogance and absurd impositions. History has consistently shown that such policies are doomed to fail.

To Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico: thank you for your courage. Cuba stands with you. The people of the Americas watch you with well-deserved respect.

Translated by Sergio A. Paneque Díaz / CubaSí Translated Staff