Dear all,

We welcome you to the Greater Caribbean Monitor (GCaM).

Two of Latin America’s most prominent presidents are confronting challenges that extend far beyond their national borders. In Argentina, Javier Milei has reopened the historic dispute over the Falkland Islands, while El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele has deployed special forces to Haiti following the kidnapping of four Salvadoran military personnel.

Their circumstances could hardly be more different, but both developments illustrate an increasingly important transformation in Latin American politics: governments seeking to project influence beyond their borders rather than limiting their ambitions to domestic affairs.

For Milei, the instrument is economic power. By leveraging Argentina’s enormous energy potential, particularly Vaca Muerta, his administration is attempting to pressure international companies involved in extracting oil from waters whose sovereignty remains disputed with Britain. It is an unconventional strategy that has already disrupted parts of the project’s supply chain.

Bukele faces a considerably more immediate challenge. Having built his presidency around dismantling El Salvador’s criminal gangs, he must now confront organizations operating in a country where state authority has largely collapsed. His response will test the possibilities and limitations of exporting his security doctrine to an entirely different environment.

Both stories reveal the importance of state capacity in an increasingly unstable hemisphere. Whether through economic leverage or military force, governments are discovering that defending national interests requires institutions capable of exercising influence beyond their own territories. For Washington, these developments also underscore the growing strategic importance of Latin American partners willing to assume greater responsibility for regional security and geopolitical affairs.

As always, please feel free to share GCaM with your friends and colleagues. We all, at the GCaM team, wish you a good weekend, and we thank you for your support.

President Nayib Bukele has deployed Salvadoran special forces to Haiti after four of his country’s military personnel were kidnapped by criminal gangs near Port-au-Prince. The operation marks an extraordinary escalation of El Salvador’s involvement in the Caribbean nation’s security crisis, transforming what began as an aviation-support mission into a confrontation with some of the most powerful criminal organizations in the Western Hemisphere.

On October 22, an initial contingent of 100 Salvadoran special forces personnel arrived in Haiti, with another 100 expected to follow. The deployment came one day after Bukele announced a rescue operation and issued an ultimatum demanding the safe return of the four hostages. For the Salvadoran president, whose international reputation rests largely on his successful campaign to dismantle his country’s gangs, the crisis has become an unexpected test of whether his security doctrine can be applied beyond El Salvador’s borders.

On October 18, armed gang members ambushed an armored vehicle carrying four Salvadoran aviation technicians in Croix-des-Bouquets, northeast of Haiti’s capital.

The attackers opened fire and used explosives, eventually setting the vehicle ablaze. The Salvadorans managed to escape, but subsequently disappeared as armed confrontations prevented security forces from reaching the area. Helicopters dispatched to support the rescue effort also came under fire.

The attack occurred in territory where several powerful gangs operate, including Chèn Méchan, Kraze Barye and 400 Mawozo. Although Haitian authorities have confirmed the kidnapping, no organization has publicly claimed responsibility, and the hostages’ precise whereabouts remain unknown.

The Salvadorans belonged to the United Nations-authorized Gang Suppression Force (GSF), an international mission established to help Haitian authorities recover territory from criminal organizations. Their original assignment was considerably less dangerous than the circumstances in which they disappeared. According to Bukele, El Salvador’s contribution consisted primarily of aviation technicians and pilots responsible for medical evacuations, rather than personnel conducting offensive operations.

On October 21, Bukele addressed Haitian gang leaders directly, warning that failure to release the Salvadorans alive and unharmed would provoke a substantially more forceful response. His message was accompanied by images of armored vehicles advancing through smoke and damaged infrastructure, illustrating the intensity of the confrontations already underway.

The deployment of special operations personnel the following day demonstrated that the Salvadoran government was prepared to expand its military involvement to recover its citizens. Since launching his domestic crackdown in 2022, El Salvador has experienced a dramatic decline in reported homicides and a substantial weakening of the gangs that previously controlled entire communities. His approach has attracted international attention, although mass arrests and restrictions on due process have also generated criticism from human rights organizations.

Haiti, however, presents a different security environment. Its criminal organizations operate amid institutional collapse, fragmented territorial authority and an exceptionally weak central government. Unlike El Salvador, where Bukele consolidated political and institutional control before intensifying security operations, Haiti depends heavily on international forces to support its own police.

The immediate priority remains recovering the four Salvadorans. As of October 23, authorities have not publicly confirmed their condition or location, although Salvadoran and American officials reportedly believe they survived the ambush. Beyond their rescue, the episode illustrates the difficulties facing any international effort to restore security in Haiti.

Bukele has demonstrated that he is willing to reinforce his country’s commitment rather than withdraw following the attack. Whether that response produces results will depend on operational intelligence, cooperation with Haitian authorities and the capabilities of the multinational force.

A security mission established to confront Haiti’s criminal organizations now faces the challenge of protecting its own personnel from those same groups. The confrontation offers Bukele an international test of the security policies that transformed El Salvador. For Haiti, it underscores the distance separating the deployment of international forces from the restoration of effective state authority.

More than four decades after Argentina’s disastrous war with Britain over the Falkland Islands, President Javier Milei has reopened one of the country’s oldest territorial disputes. This time, however, Buenos Aires is pursuing a different strategy, using the country’s enormous energy resources to pressure companies involved in British oil exploration near the islands.

In September, Milei announced sanctions against companies participating in the Sea Lion offshore oil project without Argentine authorization, extending the measures to shareholders, contractors and service providers. The government subsequently initiated proceedings against 60 individuals and legal entities and introduced legislation to strengthen its enforcement powers.

The confrontation has already produced tangible consequences. American oilfield services giant Halliburton confirmed on October 2 that it would not participate in Sea Lion, while the project’s developers subsequently acknowledged replacing two contractors. For a territorial dispute historically defined by diplomatic protests and military confrontation, Argentina has discovered a different source of leverage: access to one of the world’s most promising energy markets.

Located approximately 220 kilometers north of the Falklands, Sea Lion was discovered in 2010 by British company Rockhopper Exploration. Despite its substantial petroleum resources, the project remained commercially uncertain for years because of high development costs, logistical challenges and fluctuating oil prices.

That changed in December 2025, when Rockhopper and its Israeli operating partner, Navitas Petroleum, approved the project’s first development phase. The initial stage targets approximately 170 million recoverable barrels, with peak production expected to reach 50,000 barrels per day. First oil is scheduled for 2028.

For the Falklands, whose population numbers fewer than 4,000, the development could substantially expand economic activity and public revenues, strengthening the islands’ capacity to finance their own institutions. For Argentina, however, every additional investment risks reinforcing British control over territory Buenos Aires considers an integral part of its national sovereignty.

Argentina possesses Vaca Muerta, a vast shale formation in Patagonia that has become central to the country’s economic ambitions. An August 2026 assessment estimated its technically recoverable oil resources at approximately 30.17 billion barrels, although these figures should not be confused with commercially proven reserves.

The development of Vaca Muerta requires substantial international investment, sophisticated drilling technology and extensive logistical infrastructure. For multinational energy companies, access to this expanding market offers opportunities considerably larger than those associated with a single offshore project. Buenos Aires is attempting to exploit that difference.

Under the government’s proposed restrictions, companies involved in unauthorized resource exploitation around the Falklands could face barriers to doing business in Argentina, including restrictions affecting contractors and service providers. This creates a commercial dilemma, where a company considering participation in Sea Lion must weigh the potential profits against the possibility of losing access to Argentina’s broader energy industry.

Halliburton’s withdrawal illustrates how that pressure can influence corporate decisions. On October 5, Rockhopper confirmed that two contractors were being replaced, although it maintained that development would continue without material disruption. Milei has therefore achieved a limited but measurable result without threatening military action or abandoning his government’s emphasis on attracting foreign investment.

The renewed confrontation introduces an additional complication into Washington’s relationships with two important partners. Milei has cultivated an exceptionally close relationship with President Donald Trump, whose administration has suggested reconsidering aspects of America’s traditional approach to the sovereignty dispute.

Britain, however, remains one of Washington’s closest military and intelligence allies. Any significant change in American policy would therefore carry implications extending well beyond Argentina. Domestic politics also matters. With Argentina’s presidential election approaching in 2027, the Falklands offer Milei an issue capable of uniting voters across otherwise deeply polarized political divisions.

Nevertheless, Sea Lion’s scheduled production in 2028 gives the dispute an urgency independent of electoral considerations. Once substantial investment has been committed and petroleum revenues begin flowing, the economic incentives supporting the existing arrangements could become considerably stronger.

Argentina’s defeat in 1982 established the limits of military force in its confrontation with Britain. Forty-four years later, Milei is testing whether economic influence can accomplish what diplomatic protests have repeatedly failed to achieve.

Whether that leverage will ultimately change Britain’s position remains uncertain. What is already clear is that the Falklands dispute has entered a new phase, one in which the decisions of international energy companies may prove as consequential as those of diplomats.