Wednesday, June 25, 2025

Chinese Ports in Latin America

Just a quick note documenting the expansion of Chinese influence.
 
Chinese companies are now involved in the construction or operation of 31 active ports in Latin America and the Caribbean — a significantly higher number than previously reported, according to new findings from the Center for Strategic and International Studies …
 
This includes ports built by companies such as CK Hutchison and state‑backed entities such as China Merchants Port.
 
U.S. analysts warn that key ports - especially Kingston, Jamaica, and Manzanillo and Veracruz, Mexico - present strategic vulnerabilities.[1]

Regarding Kingston, Jamaica,
 
The Chinese firm China Merchants Port Holdings is now in complete control of Kingston Freeport Terminal Limited (KFTL), the entity responsible for managing the Port of Kingston under a concession agreement made with Jamaica’s government. The agreement has a duration of 30 years.[2]

Regarding Mexico,
 
China is funding the expansion of the port of Veracruz Medico through China Harbour Engineering company. The expansion project will make Veracruz the second largest port in Mexico. In addition, the Port of Manzanillo is undergoing a $2.7 billion expansion project that will make it Latin America’s largest maritime gateway. Chinese companies like Hutchinson Whampoa have control over piers in several Mexican states, including Baja California, Colima, Michoacán, and Morelia.
 
In recent years, direct investment from Chinese companies into Mexico has experienced significant growth. This surge is evident in the figures, rising from $38m in 2011 to $386m in 2021. Notably, Chinese companies now represent the fastest-growing source of foreign investment in Mexico.[3]

Aside from the obvious concerns about China establishing control over ports and, eventually, shipping, Chinese influence on the political actions of cash and investment starved countries bodes ill for the US.  Again, China is not doing anything the US couldn’t have done.  We need to engage.  You can’t win a war if you don’t engage.
 
All of this demonstrates just one of the many ways that the Chinese are conducting their war of global domination:  control the ports and you control the global economy while simultaneously establishing strategic strongholds and gaining influence over the host countries.  We talk about all-domain warfare in our pathetic, limited understanding of the term while the Chinese are practicing true all-domain warfare, as we speak.
 
The US and the Western world need to recognize that a war is happening, now, and engage with urgency.  There is no reason that the US couldn’t have done what China did.  We were just too geopolitically lazy.  We’re losing the war.
 
 
 
__________________________________
 
[1]Newsmax website, “Think Tank: China's Reach Goes to Latin American Ports”, Solange Reyner, 25-Jun-2025,
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/china-latin-america-caribbean/2025/06/24/id/1216332/
 
[2]Jamaicans.com website, “Chinese Company Takes Total Control Of Kingston Freeport Management Firm”, staff, 1-May-2020,
https://jamaicans.com/chinese-company-takes-total-control-of-kingston-freeport-management-firm/
 
[3]Jeff Newman Law website, “China funding port constructions in Mexico to shorten shipping routes to U.S. back door”, Jeff Newman, 23-Jan-2025
https://jeffnewmanlaw.com/china-funding-port-constructions-in-mexico-to-shorten-shipping-routes-to-the-u-s-back-door/

16 comments:

  1. PAO for Lord CornwallisJune 25, 2025 at 9:42 AM

    If you Americans had stayed a part of the British Empire, we wouldn't be having these problems.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hmmm ... maybe it's time to make England our 51st state.

      Delete
    2. (just for a laugh) shouldn't we be the 53rd after Canada and Greenland. lol.

      Delete
    3. You read this blog so consider yourself an honorary American!

      Delete
  2. China has started buying land near US air bases in CONUS. It's a concerning development, especially given how the Ukranians were able to smuggle drones into Russia to conduct short range drone attacks on the Russian bomber force.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One option would be to ban all Chinese people and companies from the US or any actions involving the US. Would that solve a lot of our problems? What do you think?

      Delete
    2. China is at war with us and, from their perspective, every Chinese citizen and company in the US is a soldier in that war. The US needs to begin fighting in kind.

      Delete
  3. You write "There is no reason that the US couldn’t have done what China did".

    Well, I can suggest one reason. Would setting up such ports have brought rapid, significant profits to the companies involved? If not, forget about the national interest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "If not, forget about the national interest."

      That's a very short-sighted take on the issue. I have no idea about the profitability of any specific venture although there seems to be no lack of firms vying for the business so that would suggest a profit to be had. Beyond that, if we deemed it part of our national geopolitical strategy, that would be a worthwhile investment on the part of the government in the form of subsidies, favorable tax situations, and favorable regulations. There are many ways to 'pay' for things. We certainly have ample precedent in the form of all the green energy companies and undertakings the government has subsidized (generally failures!) and those weren't even of national strategic importance.

      Now, put a little more thought into the issue and try again!

      Delete
  4. Tim here. I’m sure I missed it before, but this is the first time I heard from you defining “war” beyond kinetic means. If so, can discussion of war broadened to geopolitics and economic arenas?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My goodness, you certainly have missed it! Multi-domain war has been a recurring theme of mine for a long, long time! The blog is about naval matters and, specifically, not about politics, however, a brief mention of geopolitical or economic factors that directly impact military matters is acceptable.

      Delete
  5. What does US government offer, instead? hawkish "American value"? in front of $$$$$$$, it is a banana!

    Give them genuine gold and silver, they will flood to Americans!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The question is not what DOES the US offer ... we don't offer much and nothing coherent. The real question is what SHOULD the US be offering and the answer to that is fairly straightforward: infrastructure, mutually beneficial trade arrangements, access to US markets, loans, etc.

      Delete
    2. There were some steps towards that in the previous administration - I'm reminded of SecDef Austin at the Shangri-La Dialogue talking about the benefits the US was offering, painting a marked contrast to China's messaging, which was that the Asian states should pivot to China because America bad and China is a good neighbour that has never invaded anybody, unlike the warmonger US.

      At which point the Indian and Vietnamese delegations stood up and reminded the Chinese that China had invade both countries in the 80s.

      Delete
  6. Read where the Panama Canal deal is with US company now to deal with ports etc.. But the Chinese are investing in another canal going through Nicaraga which may be online in a few years. This canal would compete with the Panama Canal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Chinese are investing in another canal going through Nicaraga which"

      As far as I know, that project was cancelled by the Nicaraguan legislative body. Please investigate and give us an update with correct information.

      Delete

Comments will be moderated for posts older than 7 days in order to reduce spam.