China’s growing footprint in the North and South American continents has stirred a complex debate in global strategic circles. With massive infrastructure investments, trade partnerships, and diplomatic overtures, Beijing presents itself as a global economic partner. However, critics argue that China lacks a coherent and respectful foreign policy for the Americas. Instead, what exists is a patchwork of foreign relations, transactional and often tone-deaf to the historical, political, and cultural realities of the Western Hemisphere.
At the heart of this issue lies a fundamental misunderstanding of regional geopolitics. If Chinese officials had studied the Monroe Doctrine—America’s historical policy of limiting foreign interference in the Western Hemisphere—they would have realized that the USA is deeply sensitive to foreign influence, especially when it seems to come with strings attached. In North and South America, sovereign pride and historical memory run deep. China’s approach, often rooted in opaque diplomacy and aggressive commercial deals, has made many nations wary.
Take Panama, for example. China invested heavily in infrastructure and logistics around the Panama Canal, hoping to control key trade routes. However, these efforts are increasingly facing resistance. Growing speculation suggests that Chinese companies may be asked to withdraw from strategic projects in Panama, primarily due to national US security concerns and rising distrust about Beijing’s intentions. This isn’t an isolated case. An emerging pattern of diplomatic unease throughout the region—from Colombia to Argentina, Jamaica to Chile—reveals that Chinese involvement is viewed with increasing suspicion.
China’s global behavior largely fuels mistrust. The Chinese Communist Party has a long track record of supporting authoritarian regimes, whether in Africa, the Middle East, or Latin America. This has raised alarm bells in democratic nations, where the public and leadership are increasingly vocal about the dangers of aligning too closely with Beijing. It’s no surprise that China’s most controversial partnerships are with autocratic governments like Nicolás Maduro’s Venezuela—a regime widely condemned for human rights abuses and economic mismanagement.
In Guyana, the situation is particularly sensitive. The Guyanese government and people have demonstrated openness to business with international partners, including China. However, recent remarks by a Chinese foreign ministry official, suggesting that Guyana should negotiate with Venezuela—a country that has made unjustified claims on large swathes of Guyanese territory—have sparked outrage. Such statements are perceived not only as interference in domestic affairs but also as an endorsement of Maduro’s aggressive stance. Guyanese citizens, already wary of Venezuela’s ambitions, view such advice from China as a betrayal. It reinforces the perception that China is willing to compromise the sovereignty of small nations for its strategic gain.
This misstep is more than a diplomatic blunder; it’s a cardinal error. Guyana, a country striving to protect its territorial integrity and national identity, does not take lightly to foreign powers dictating its foreign policy choices. Many now believe that if China wishes to do business with Venezuela, it is welcome, but not at the cost of Guyana’s sovereignty or dignity. Such comments from Chinese officials only deepen public resentment and raise questions about Beijing’s true intentions in Guyana, the Caribbean, and South America.
Moreover, China must recognize that military strength and economic power are not the only tools of global influence. The United States, the United Kingdom, and India maintain strategic influence in the region through their power, trust, diplomacy, and consistent support for democratic institutions. India has cultivated a reputation for fostering respectful and mutually beneficial relations worldwide. In fact, India’s professional and disciplined military, combined with its non-interventionist foreign policy, has garnered admiration even from countries that traditionally fall outside its sphere of influence.
The legacy of the 1962 India-China war reminds Indians that trust, once broken, is difficult to rebuild. Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai’s betrayal of Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru after cordial diplomatic exchanges still resonates in India’s strategic thinking today. China’s constant rhetoric that it’ taught India a lesson in 1962′ is not only arrogant but also outdated. Today, India’s army, air force, and navy are fully capable of defending national interests, and its regional posture is much more assertive. India has professional military troops stationed on the border with China, including the Indian Gurkha regiments, the most feared soldiers in the world.
Mr. Modi has made it clear that India is ready and prepared for any potential military incursion by anyone in the world. This shift in India’s strategic confidence aligns with developments in Latin America, where smaller nations are starting to resist what they perceive as Chinese overreach.
China must recognize that the world has changed. Power is no longer measured solely by the size of an economy or the reach of the Belt and Road Initiative; it also encompasses credibility, respect, and values. Suppose Beijing truly wishes to become a trusted global leader. In that case, it must move beyond transactional diplomacy and establish a coherent, principled, and respectful foreign policy, especially when engaging with sovereign nations in the Americas.
Like many others in the region, Guyana is open for business—but not for bullying. The Chinese government must learn to listen, not lecture. Otherwise, it risks being shut out—not just by Guyana, but by an entire continent ready to choose partners who value their independence, history, and future.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently visited Guyana and delivered a strong message regarding the situation with Venezuela. He made it unequivocally clear that any incursion by Nicolás Maduro’s regime would trigger severe consequences. This marks a firm stance by the United States, reminiscent of the Trump administration’s opposition to Maduro’s actions in the region.
China and other global players should take heed of the Monroe Doctrine and tread carefully before engaging in provocative behavior in South America. The presence and military power of the United States remain a dominant force in the Western Hemisphere.
The newly appointed Chinese Ambassador, Yang Yang, must exercise greater discretion in public statements, especially compared to the previous envoy, Huang Rui, whose overly assertive remarks caused concern. The people of Guyana are highly sensitive about the Venezuela border controversy, which is a matter of deep national interest and pride.
Guyana has long welcomed Chinese investment and enterprise, as evidenced by the thousands of Chinese shopkeepers contributing to the local economy and the significant infrastructure contracts awarded to Chinese companies. However, this economic cooperation must be matched with diplomatic sensitivity.
On Wednesday, during a press briefing, the Chargé d’Affaires of the Chinese Embassy was firmly rebuked by the Guyana Ministry of Foreign Affairs for suggesting that Guyana and Venezuela should negotiate the ongoing border dispute. Vice President Dr. Bharrat Jagdeo publicly described China’s call for “friendly” negotiations as improper and out of place, given that the matter is currently before the International Court of Justice.
Finally, Ambassador Yang Yang now faces the critical task of rebuilding public trust and reassuring the Guyanese people that China’s position respects Guyana’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Strategic diplomacy and careful messaging will be essential moving forward.