Kast faces internal resistance for having added Chile to Trump’s Shield of the Americas

One week after Chile joined the Shield of the Americas, the regional alliance promoted by U.S. President Donald Trump, domestic resistance against the move has not let up. On the contrary, the membership documents ratified by the government of José Antonio Kast in New York on September 22, along with 14 other countries, have raised new questions about the scope of the initiative.

The far-right administration has insisted that this is not a treaty —which would create binding obligations— but rather “a political declaration” that contains no signatures and is intended to fight transnational crime “in all its dimensions,” Foreign Minister Francisco Pérez Mackenna said Monday during questioning in Congress.

But the declaration published by the U.S. State Department shows that the initiative goes beyond security: it includes three pillars —economic, security and multilateral coordination.

The Shield of the Americas has been adopted by the governments of the United States, Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guyana, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, and Trinidad and Tobago. Of those, Chile is the only country where the alliance has sparked a deep debate and has been harshly criticized by the opposition, including former presidents Michelle Bachelet (2006–2010, 2014–2018) and Gabriel Boric (2022–2026).

In one of its paragraphs, for example, the declaration refers to the need to “defend our economies by enhancing economic cooperation; exploring investment screening mechanisms; safeguarding critical minerals supply chains through diversified and reliable sourcing.”

On security, the alliance text states it recognizes as “an immediate and universally shared threat” the one posed by “transnational narco-terrorist organizations, which endanger the peace and security of our hemisphere.” It then lists 24 criminal groups —none Chilean— but does include the Tren de Aragua, of Venezuelan origin, which has operated in Chile roughly since 2018, and which has changed the criminal landscape there. It also adds the Mexican groups Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG) and the Sinaloa Cartel, which have made nascent inroads in Chile.

Part of the controversy surrounding the agreement concerns the way information was delivered. On September 22, shortly before the full text issued by the U.S. State Department was made public that same day, Kast’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying Chile “has decided to adhere to the international initiative Shield of the Americas,” although it limited the agreement to “a voluntary coordination among governments in the Americas that will allow for more effective combat against transnational organized crime.” There was, however, no mention of the other two pillars listed in the official text.

By contrast, it was Bachelet and Boric who addressed the other two aspects —and did so in an alarmed tone. In an unprecedented joint statement, they intervened in the debate on September 24, two days after the U.S. publication of the declaration’s contents. The former presidents urged the Kast government to “reconsider Chile’s continued participation” in the Shield of the Americas because “in the current geopolitical scenario, Chile should not be forced to choose a side. It must strengthen its alliances and relations with different countries and regions, without exclusions imposed from outside and always preserving its strategic autonomy.” They added they were concerned that the text’s use of concepts such as a “continental sovereignty” could end up weakening the fundamental principle of national sovereignty that Chile has historically defended.

The statement did not sit well with the Kast government. On Sunday, Claudio Alvarado, interior minister and government spokesman, said the arguments of the left-leaning former presidents “do not have much logic or sense” because they call for protecting Chile’s autonomy when the alliance agreement aims to “defend sovereignty and safeguard autonomy.” He said participation in the regional group does not mean Chile is subordinated to Washington because “cooperating is not subordinating oneself to anything.”

A path that began in March

On March 7, when Kast was president-elect and had only four days left before officially taking office at La Moneda, he raced to Florida at Trump’s invitation to attend the inauguration of the Shield of the Americas summit, which was also attended by 12 other Latin American leaders. At that time, Chile held only observer status in the alliance, but six months later it ended up joining the agreement, so one of the many questions that have arisen is what happened in the meantime that led Chile to take a further step.

Some clues were offered last week by Mariano Fernández, foreign minister during Bachelet’s first administration (2006–2010). He recalled how Francisco Pérez Mackenna acknowledged in a private meeting with other former foreign ministers, held in mid-September on the eve of the U.N. General Assembly, that the United States had pressured Chile to join the Shield of the Americas.

According to Fernández, Kast’s foreign minister admitted at that meeting that “it was very difficult” for the government not to adhere to the alliance.

The controversy over the agreement was also addressed Sunday by the writer, political analyst and National Journalism Prize winner Ascanio Cavallo. In a column in the newspaper La Tercera titled El escudo envenenado (The poisoned shield), he wrote that, “like protectionist trade policies driven by tariffs, the Shield of the Americas has been changing in form, rules and scope.” “At first it seemed possible to adhere rhetorically, without commitment, almost as a signal to make criminal cartels flee out of sheer fear,” but then things changed. He highlighted Trump’s absence on the day the agreement was finalized, although “his principal executors” were present: his secretary of state, Marco Rubio, and the White House trade chief —that is, Cavallo writes, “the gun on the table.” He went on to say that the declaration was read “and presented as signed by everyone: from that point on, everyone is a signatory, everyone is a member of the Shield of the Americas. No one remains half-embroiled,” he said regarding the 14 countries, not counting the United States.

That weekend, the Kast government tried to contain the criticism by asserting that Chile was the only country that attempted to modify the joint declaration drafted by the United States for the Shield of the Americas agreement. That was the Foreign Ministry’s version, published by both La Tercera and El Mercurio.

According to El Mercurio, in order to be part of what the Foreign Ministry called a “negotiation” —while Mariano Fernández spoke of pressure— Pérez Mackenna made two requests that were accepted by the United States and the other countries. One of them, the newspaper says, was included in the declaration’s fifth paragraph, which establishes that one of the alliance’s tasks is to “defend and promote mutual respect for national sovereignty and the self-determination of each nation through multilateral forums to coordinate and advance common objectives (...)”. The second, the paper adds, appears in the seventh paragraph and also alludes to sovereignty.

On Monday morning, five opposition lawmakers —Communists Luis Cuello, Daniela Serrano and Irací Hassler; Broad Front member Jaime Bassa; and Socialist Juan Santana— filed a complaint with the Comptroller General of the Republic, which oversees the actions of state officials, asking it to review the legality of Chile’s incorporation into the Shield of the Americas. According to Cuello, the alliance is “a covert international treaty” that “is being passed off as an agreement of good intentions” but which “establishes obligations for states and, moreover, represents a danger, a threat, to Chile’s sovereignty.”

In the afternoon, during questioning in the Chamber of Deputies, Foreign Minister Pérez Mackenna was asked by Socialist lawmaker Nelson Venegas whether he had reviewed the declaration before Chile signed it. Pérez Mackenna replied that in this case “there was no signature.” Later, the deputy reminded him that U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had said the Shield of the Americas also seeks for its members to vote together in international forums and to coordinate economic and diplomatic matters.

Pérez reiterated that it is a nonbinding political declaration: “We are perfectly free to treat this as a treaty. It is not one,” he said. “Chile cooperates and will cooperate with anyone who helps us jointly combat transnational organized crime (...) Therefore, I can say that any initiatives that allow us to improve effectiveness in the fight against organized crime will be welcomed in our country,” the foreign minister added.

The Senate has called a special session on October 7 to analyze Chile’s accession to the Shield of the Americas.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition