That's a good point on how China may be attempting to promote the their model of government in the LAC region. Through mechanisms like BIR loans and surveillance technology exports, they can strengthen current autocrats and pressure weak democracies into becoming more authoritarian.

The Bahamas seem like a good example of the risks that come from accepting Chinese funds. While I'm sure Chinese real estate helped their tourism industry to thrive, they are now stuck in a debt-trap and essentially beholden to Chinese influence. This is why it's so important for the West to provide alternative forms of financing in areas like this.

I always find it interesting to see the strategies that other countries are embracing through documents like these. The Chinese government seems to emphasizing their hopes for mutually beneficial cooperation. They have highlighted a desire to further develop stable economic relations through free trade agreements an industrial investment. Many LAC countries have benefitted significantly from the growth and exports markets created by Chinese trade, so they will likely embrace this. However, as these countries integrate further with China they may become dependent on them. We see a similar dynamic playing out with China's promise to provide loans to LAC countries as part of the Belt and Road initiative. While this may help develop infrastructure in the region, we have also seen many of the countries involved in this program end up saddled with significant debt. These countries would then be pressured to go along with what China says or risk them demanding immediate payment or even seizing assets. It will be vital for the US to provide an economic alterative to this entrapment. I also found the emphasis China put on supporting local governments interesting. Stability is a primary goal of LAC governments, so they will likely be open to receiving help in this area. This will likely especially be the case with authoritarian and illiberal regimes, who may admire the Chinese style of governance and accept their support in areas like policing and mass surveillance. This will not only strengthen authoritarianism, but also create more avenues for China to establish a commercial and military presence in the region. To further these objectives, they seem to be emphasizing winning the battle for public opinion. This document lays out plans for collaboration in areas like the media, academia, and NGOs that could easily be leveraged to promote pro-China sentiment. To combat this, it will be essential for the US to not only up our own messaging, but also to provide a compelling plan to benefit the region that will gain public support and provide a viable alternative to China.

It does seem like NGOs are often overlooked when designing strategies like these. However, their political actions really can make a difference when it comes to certain issues. Hopefully we are able to expand on these partnerships going forward.

It is definitely important that we present ourselves as a favorable alternative to other powers when it comes to foreign collaboration. Focusing on issues they care about seems like the most compelling way of doing so.

The scenarios discussed in which our great power rivals would gain a geopolitical foothold in the LAC region seem like they would all pose a significant risk to our national security. However, I think many of the policy options discussed can help counter this influence. I agree that properly motoring the situation is essential here, as this will give us a better idea of the specific threats we will need to respond to. Using preexisting statues like the Inter-American Democratic Charter can also help combat authoritarian influence in the region. I also think this briefing does a good job of laying out how we should design our messaging. It's definitely important that we don't make these countries feel like they're just pawns being used in our competition with China, so it makes sense to focus on issues that our countries can mutually benefit from. Building multilateral coalitions in areas like fishing and economic development can advance our collective interests while combatting Chinese influence. I also like the idea of using regional allies and friendly NGOs to expand our influence, as they will likely be able to better get the message across due to their understanding of local attitudes and circumstances.

It definitely seems like China's economic power is their primary form of leverage in the LAC region. By strengthening our ties with these countries, hopefully we can prevent them from becoming economically dependent on China.

I agree that we ought to prioritize cost-effective strategies going forward. We don't have unlimited resources we can use in this area, so prioritizing measures that have the greatest impact will be essential to maintaining our influence in the LAC.

This article does a good job of explaining the importance of the LAC region to the US. We not only benefit from trade and other forms of regional cooperation, but also from the security that our influence there provides. This is why its concerning that nations like Iran and Russia are bolstering autocratic regimes and attempting to establish a presence there. Unless the US works to substantially engage with the LAC countries and work with them to address security issues, we could quickly see our adversaries gain a significant foothold on our doorstep. It seems that China currently poses the most significant threat to US influence in this area. While the US still makes up the majority of trade with these countries, their commercial activity with China has been increasing substantially in recent years. We have also seen China use other soft power tactics like Belt and Road Initiative infrastructure investments and vaccine diplomacy to gain leverage in this area. The US can offset this by working to build more more comprehensive free trade agreements and providing alternate forms of financing to regional nations. We can also work to provide alternatives to China in 5G and other areas where Chinese companies pose a legitimate regional security risk. However, what may be more dangerous then any of this is China's military and technological support for authoritarian regimes in the region. This influence will be more difficult to combat, as we don't have a substantial commercial relationship with these countries that we can leverage. However, I think the US can play a role in containing this sort of authoritarianism by supporting democracy in nations that are vulnerable to backsliding.

It definitely seems like these areas are very interconnected, with economic conditions, criminal activity, and political instability often going hand-in-hand. This highlights the importance of a comprehensive approach to addressing issues in the LAC region.

I agree that cooperation between the US and these LAC countries is going to be important going forward. We have a clear common interest in areas like transnational migration and climate change, and working together in areas like these could help forge stronger relationships.

The Latin American and Caribbean regions (LAC) are of vital interest due to our close proximity to them. There are a number of lucrative trade deals the US has in this region, including the Dominican Republic-Central America Free Trade Agreement worth nearly $53 billion. It is important that we play help ensure regional stability, as we have seen the negative spillover effects like drug trafficking and illegal migration that have resulted from insecurity in the LAC. We can play a role in directly combatting drug cartels through programs like Plan Columbia, which helped the Columbian military reduce cocaine production in the country by 72%. Aid like the $4 billion pledged by the Biden administration to Central America can also help improve living conditions and cut down on the root causes of instability. Additionally, ensuring that they receive enough vaccine doses will help these countries recover from the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, we should confront authoritarian governments like Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua that are circumventing democratic and regional norms. This region has become significantly less stable in recent weeks. The assassination of President Jovenel Moïse was a strong blow to the already tumultuous political system in Haiti. We have already seen increases in violence and criminal activity due to the power vacuum created by his overthrow. There has also been widespread protests against the Cuban government, some of which have been violently suppressed by police forces there. The Biden administration has taken some action in both of these instances, dispatching technical officials to Haiti and sanctioning top Cuban officials. However, as these situations worsen it will remain to be seen if further steps are taken.

It seems like more countries in the area does raise the risk of confrontation. However, I think Finland's desire for peace and close relationship with the US and the Nordic countries on the Arctic Council makes the probability that they'll be a conflict instigator relatively low. Hopefully they can even play a role in making the area more peaceful through confect resolution.

I agree that Finland seems to be attempting to act as a moderator in areas such as peace and climate change. While they certainly have their ambitions in the Arctic, it seems like they're more focused on getting other countries to embrace their concerns in these areas. I'm interested to see the sort of role they play on the Arctic Council.

Based off this document, it seems like Finland is taking a sort of mediatory role in the Arctic. They have made it clear that one of their primary goals there is to promote peace between the countries in the region. This is an understandable goal, as their close proximity to Russia would leave them in a dangerous position if there were to be a conflict between Russia and any of the NATO states that have a presence there. One of the strategies towards this goal I found interesting was their goal of allowing cooperation across sectoral boundaries. While it does seem like allowing more cross-border activity could allow for more high quality research, it is also important that we maintain clearly defined boundaries to avoid disagreements over what might constitute a nation's territory. Finland is also putting a great degree of emphasis on climate change and indigenous populations in the Arctic. These are both areas that will be vital for regional wellbeing. Much of their perspective her seems to be informed by their idea of a "circular economy" which emphasizes crating a renewable and low-waste consumption model. I am interested to see whether they are able to successfully implement this, as it seems like it could be a potential model for the use of Arctic resources.

I also found it pretty interesting to see how important the Arctic is to transnational communication. It's somewhat disturbing to see how vulnerable we are in this area, so I'm glad that the DHS is understands the importance protecting infrastructure in this area.

It does seem important to ensure that other nations don't misinterpret our actions in the Arctic. Hopefully the communications strategies laid out in this document can prevent dangerous misunderstandings from taking place.

I am glad to see that the second half of this strategy includes more specifics regarding the DHS's operations in the Arctic. It's good to know that they are monitoring changes in the region due to factors like climate change, as up to date information in this area will be necessary to have a coherent Arctic policy. Communication, both within government and with our Arctic partners, will also be important to ensuring we have a complete picture of the situation. This document made also me aware of the extent to which we have infrastructure like undersea cables and satellite technology based in the Arctic. It will be vital that we continue to protect these from threats such as natural disasters and foreign interference. It is also good that we are working to protect freedom of travel and practical cooperation in the region, as this will allow all nations to reap the benefits of Arctic exploration. The attempts by more nations to become involved in the Arctic makes it more important then ever to ensure that we have a rules-based order there.

It is encouraging to see the DHS working to advance non-military priorities there. I definitely agree that these should be geared towards helping all regional stakeholders including indigenous groups.

That's a really interesting point about seeing the DHS take a greater role in foreign policy. While the DHS has been involved with areas like immigration and the coast guard with transnational aspects, this is the first time that I know of when they have been substantially involved with a region that isn't solely under US jurisdiction. This makes me wonder if we'll see more activity like this in the future.