Washington Wednesday: Global pressure points

Editor's note: The following text is a transcript of a podcast story. To listen to the story, click on the arrow beneath the headline above.

NICK EICHER, HOST: It’s Washington Wednesday—foreign-policy edition.

We begin in the Caribbean, where American military power is on the move.

Late last week the Pentagon ordered the USS Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group to redeploy: It’s moving from the Mediterranean toward the Caribbean.

Officials say the carrier and its escort ships are now in transit across the Atlantic. They’re expected to arrive within days.

The stated mission is to target drug traffickers, but the timing and the firepower suggest something more—a possible escalation toward Venezuela.

LINDSAY MAST, HOST: That order builds on a campaign that’s already seen more than ten U.S. strikes on suspected drug-running vessels in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, yesterday, another set of strikes taking out four more vessels. The actions have killed now close to 60 suspected drug runners.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says the goal is to treat “narco-terrorists” the same way the U.S. treats al-Qaeda.

HEGSETH: So our message to these foreign terrorist organizations is we will treat you like we have treated al -Qaeda. We will find you, we will map your networks, we will hunt you down, and we will kill you.

EICHER: Senator Lindsey Graham says President Trump “has all the authority he needs” and that the days of Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro “are numbered.”

Venezuelan officials call that fabrication for “a new eternal war.”

Joining us now political scientist and WORLD Opinions contributor Hunter Baker. Good morning.

HUNTER BAKER: Good morning.

EICHER: Hunter—big picture first:

Has the Trump administration crossed the line from a counter-narcotics mission to a regime-change operation?

BAKER: I think that regime change is the intent. I think that that's what is really going on here. I think that Maduro has been an illegitimate leader of Venezuela for a number of years now, and I think that Donald Trump is ratcheting up the pressure, trying, I think, to get Maduro to leave.

Now, why does Trump think he can do that? Well, I don't think that Maduro is popular. I think that he has become what we might term a tyrant, which is to say he does not have the support of the mass of people in Venezuela. And therefore, when you're in that situation, what's keeping you in power is basically the military, and the reason they're keeping you in power is because you are paying them. And so if someone else comes along who can sort of present a counterweight to the military of Venezuela, then people start thinking about switching sides. And I think that that's what's ultimately going to happen in Venezuela. I think people are going to start switching sides, and I think that Maduro will end up leaving.

EICHER: I do want to get to the policy question, because I know already there's some move to try to clip the President's wings by using the War Powers resolution. But do you see this as more of a continuation of the Monroe Doctrine tradition, or do you think it's something new in American policy in the hemisphere?

BAKER: The United States has ever been attentive to what is going on in Latin America. We have certainly been attentive to Cuba. We had an existential crisis in Cuba during the Kennedy administration, as many may recall. But we have also paid attention to the various Marxist movements in Latin America, and I think that that's part of what's going on here. Is that Maduro is a Marxist dictator. I think that Marco Rubio is an interested party here. I think that he has been interested in seeing Maduro go before, and I think that they just are taking the advantage, especially in the wake of this Nobel Peace Prize win from sort of the leader of democracy in Venezuela, to apply pressure. And like I say, I think it's going to work.

MAST: We turn now to Argentina’s colorful president Javier Milei, the free-market economist elected in 2023 on a promise to rescue the country from fiscal collapse.

Milei scored a decisive midterm political win this week—his party now controls a third of Congress. That’s enough to defend his decrees and austerity plan.

MILEI [Spanish]: I have no doubt in telling you that, starting on December 10, we will have, without a doubt, the most reformist Congress in Argentine history.

What he’s saying is that when the legislature returns on December 10th, “we will have, without a doubt, the most reformist Congress in Argentine history.”

Per The Wall Street Journal: Inflation has plunged from 200 to 32 percent, the budget is balanced, and Washington has arranged a $40 billion rescue package.

At the same time, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is tasked with pressing Milei to curb Chinese influence over Argentina’s telecom and mining sectors.

Hunter, the economic stats are impressive… but I don’t think anybody in the U.S. would consider a 32 percent inflation rate anything other than utterly miserable. We’re arguing over 3 percent or 2 percent.

But how do you see this election result: Is it a turning point toward a free-market, pro-U.S. Latin America—or just a brief reprieve before the populist cycle resumes?

BAKER: I'm a free market guy, so take it with a grain of salt. But I tend to see this as a world historical type of event. If you look at Argentina, sort of the home of socialist glamor, if you think about Evita Peron, the wife of the dictator of the regime who brought in the movement that has really been dominant there for approximately the last 70 years. “Don't Cry For Me Argentina,” right? If you know that song that's for Evita, and you see Milei, who swept in a couple of years ago, really, without even a political party, but as sort of a singular force. And the question was, was he going to be able to come in and make policy changes that would stick? And not long ago, there was a local, sort of provincial election that his party lost badly, and people thought, that's it, right? You know, he sort of hit the end of his tether, and he's not going to be able to defend his policies.

Enter one Donald John Trump, who says, Yes, we're going to arrange for this $40 billion rescue. But there are strings attached, right? That yes, I'm going to commit to this rescue as long as Milei does well in the elections. So a lot of people thought, well, he's not going to do well, and Trump is going to be out. But it looks like the Argentinian people listened. It looks like they believed that it was important to keep the U.S. on board, and Milei had a better result than anybody thought he was going to get. You know, I think he got over 40% of the seats, which in the Argentinian context is going to be more than enough to allow him to defend his policies.

So this is a big deal, and he may be able to build on it, and we can pair this with the Bolivians recently rejecting, I think, 18 years of Socialist rule, so there may really be something going on in Latin America. And I just want to say about that inflation rate of 32% No, it doesn't impress us in the United States at all, but when you've been living with 250% inflation, this looks like stability.

EICHER: Well, Hunter, I did want to follow up on this and ask how much of Milei's success depends on us backing and Trump's personal endorsement, but it sounds like you're saying all of it does.

BAKER: I think that it mattered. I think it mattered a lot. I think that, you know, Trump is one of the most famous people in the world, and in a way that American presidents aren't, you know, the American president is always well known, but he's a different sort of a creature. And I think that when he steps in and he says, we're here to help, but if this thing goes the wrong way, we're gone. And that's what he said, If Milei loses, we're gone. And so millet, against the odds, won.

EICHER: Well, Hunter, President Trump is wrapping up meetings in Japan and South Korea before a face-to-face with China’s Xi Jinping.

Wall Street Journal columnist Walter Russell Mead argues the administration’s moves in Venezuela and Iran aren’t side shows. Rather, they’re part of one global strategy that designed to use energy, trade, and military leverage against China.

What do you think? Is President Trump executing a coherent “whole-world” strategy to contain China—or improvising from crisis to crisis?

BAKER: I don't think it's just improvisation. I think that he is engaging in some real statecraft here, trying to look at the interests of all the different nations involved, and figuring out how to sort of balance these things in a way that will ultimately be satisfying. And I think that he's looking at China. China rising has become significant in a way that was virtually unimaginable in the early 1970s and economic power in a way that we would not have thought possible. And of course, rising to become an incredible military power as well. And I think that Trump is looking to the interested parties in places such as South Korea and Japan, and using the threat of China to get those countries to work with us, which they're doing. But at the same time, try not to make it a full on confrontation, because South Korea does want to trade with China. Japan does want to trade with China. We want to trade with China. So it's all about, how do we have strength, but the same time, retain a constructive relationship.

And the big fear right now that I think some have is what's going to happen to Taiwan. Taiwan is the bargaining chip. I mean, China is going to want Trump to relax our ambiguity about Taiwan. We have retained a strategic ambiguity. We have never exactly said, you know, for quite some time you know, if you attack Taiwan, we're going to do something about it. We're going to stop you. So we retain this ambiguity. But I think that the Chinese want Trump to say something like, we don't actually care that much. You know, we think it's okay if you sort of work Taiwan into your plans. The things that I hear from Trump aligned people is that he is not going to do that, but that would be the magic token that he could play and get whatever he wants from China. But I don't think he's going to do that.

MAST: Well, closer to home, we are now in Week 5 of the government shutdown…and now the human toll is starting to become more apparent. Federal employees missed their first full paycheck last week. Then on Monday, the largest union representing federal workers called on Congress to pass the clean CR to fund the government.

That effectively calls out the Democrats who have refused to pass the bill. Here’s House Speaker Mike Johnson:

JOHNSON: You have an offramp now. You painted yourself into a corner. But here's your off ramp. The, the unions, the largest unions are saying, please do this. You can claim that as cover and say that you had to do it.

Additionally, SNAP benefits–food stamps–will not go out on November 1st, that’s Saturday.

If there’s caving to be done, Hunter, what does it look like? That clean CR only goes until November 21st … so the shutdown has burned more than half of the time … and even if it passes today, aren’t we right back here again in three weeks?

BAKER: The federal government employee union basically calling out the Democrats and saying it's time to pass a clean funding resolution... this is a big deal, right? This is the giant crack in the coalition. Government employee unions are a critical part of the Democrat coalition nationally. And so for them to do this, you know, this is like they're basically saying, we're done playing the game. We're done kind of backing you on this. It's time to get things running.

So on top of that, you have this, the food stamps running out on November 1. That's going to apply additional pressure very quickly. And the other thing that's going to happen, and I hate to say this, because I'm flying this week, is if Americans’ travel plans begin to be impacted by this, that's going to generate another major source of pressure.

So I think that the Democrats have played this strategy about as tough as they can. And so I think it's, I think it's probably time to stop it and to go ahead and agree to the continuing resolution. Now you ask, well, so we'll be right back in this place in another three weeks or so. I think that once they break, they're going to have to break all the way, and I think that they'll have to agree to something more substantive for a longer period of time. So my prediction would be that if they break we will not be exactly back at this same place in three weeks.

EICHER: Well, hey, I made it back from Turkey. I got through TSA, I got through passport control, and everything else is working just fine. Hunter so nothing to worry about, not at all.

BAKER: I got a go to Phoenix, and I want to make sure I can get home.

EICHER: Hunter Baker is a political scientist and provost at North Greenville University. Hunter, thank you.

BAKER: Thank you.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.