In the first part of this interview, Carlos Sánchez Berzaín, director of the Inter-American Institute for Democracy (IID) and former Bolivian Defense minister, provided an assessment that reinforces the hemispheric debate on security and democracy in Latin America and the Caribbean. Sánchez Berzaín revealed how Venezuela went from being a failed state to becoming the operational epicenter of a continental criminal machine — a regime that, he warns, is the nexus for transnational crime and is sustained by drug trafficking networks and irregular structures that protect and project its influence.
In this second part, the analysis moves into a more alarming domain because the criminal convergence no longer acts in isolation. It is fueled and expanded by the intervention of China, Iran, Russia, and North Korea — extra-regional actors who, Sánchez Berzaín warns, use this illicit scaffolding to project their influence and advance geostrategic agendas that intensify political instability and security threats throughout the hemisphere.
The former minister argues that Latin America is not heading toward a scenario of global hybrid warfare; it is already immersed in it. Covert espionage bases, opaque military agreements, control of strategic minerals, and the penetration of critical infrastructure now make up a chessboard where narco-terrorist regimes and their extra-regional allies face off against democracies. The outcome, he warns, will depend on prompt, decisive action, given that the geopolitical clock continues to turn.
Diálogo: Extra-regional actors such as Iran have forged alliances with the Venezuelan regime and have penetrated its institutions and military structures. How does this infiltration process operate, and to what extent has Venezuela become a platform that allows Iran and other extra-regional actors to project influence, indoctrination, and territorial control within the hemisphere?
Carlos Sánchez Berzaín, director of the Inter-American Institute for Democracy (IID) and former Bolivian Defense minister: The narco-terrorist axis that integrates Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Bolivia functions as a platform for the expansion of external interests, and the most significant case in terms of terrorism is Iran. Its influence has been so profound that it has managed to introduce cultural and religious changes in the populations where it operates. We must not forget that Iran is a theocratic dictatorship, and it exports that influence with surgical efficiency.
Bolivia is the clearest example. At the beginning of the century, there was not a single minaret in the country. Today, Iran operates a national television network, administers religious centers in different regions, and has even changed daily habits such as cuisine, introducing Mediterranean dishes that were unknown two decades ago. It is not a question of judging whether this is good or bad, but of noting the level of penetration and political influence it represents.
Iranian intervention reached a critical point when it took control of the so-called ALBA Anti-Imperialist School, created by Evo Morales Morales to replace the U.S.-backed counterinsurgency training camp, which specialized in anti-guerrilla combat. The 2011 inauguration was attended by Ahmad Vahidi, then Iran’s Defense minister and wanted by Interpol for his alleged responsibility in the AMIA bombing in Argentina. His presence in Bolivia was an unmistakable sign of the type of alliances that were being consolidated. That school ended up becoming a center for indoctrination and training for terrorism, operated by Cuba and Iran and backed by agreements signed under the Arce administration after high-level meetings in Havana.
In Venezuela, the situation is even more serious. There are areas where Iran’s presence has gone from being an influence to total control. Iran acts with strategic freedom, occupies spaces within the state apparatus, and uses these territories as a logistical, political, and military platform to project itself throughout the region. It is one of the most worrying extraterritorial enclaves of its presence in Latin America.
Cuba also plays a key role, albeit with a more discreet profile.
Added to this is China, whose activity has been documented in U.S. Congressional hearings, where the operation of radar and electronic interception bases on Cuban territory has been confirmed. In Nicaragua, the Ortega regime has reconfigured its army with Russian doctrine and technology, now reinforced by China, Iran, and North Korea.
This network forms a cohesive bloc. What we are experiencing, I would say, is the first global war, a confrontation between dictatorships and democracies being fought on multiple fronts. In the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, only the visible combatants are seen, but behind Russia are all the dictatorships. Iran provides drones and missiles, China provides full support, North Korea sends soldiers, and Cuba deploys thousands of mercenaries.
The same dynamic is reflected in Latin America. The territories controlled by narco-terrorist regimes are at the service of these external actors. They use them for whatever they need, from logistics to political expansion. Countries that are impoverished and deliberately pushed into misery become extremely vulnerable. With very few resources, terrorism captures entire institutions and advances on national sovereignty. This is how the new axis of global destabilization operates today.
Diálogo: Within this framework, China and Russia have also expanded their influence through so-called cyber cooperation, artificial intelligence, critical infrastructure, and defense projects. If Iran, Russia, and China act as a complementary and mutually reinforcing bloc within the hemisphere, have Latin American governments underestimated the cumulative impact of these cooperations and investments? And, consequently, what does this convergence imply for sovereignty, democratic resilience, and regional security architecture?
Sánchez Berzaín: Latin American governments have not underestimated anything; they have fallen into the hands of 21st-century socialism, which, due to equipment and financing needs, handed them over to China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. This political capture opened the doors to extra-regional penetration, which is now overwhelming.
China and Russia control Bolivian lithium, while Iran dominates military agreements and participates in projects linked to nuclear development. We do not know whether the uranium that leaves Bolivia or the lithium delivered to Russia ends up in Iranian hands — a country that always obtains what it needs to continue enriching strategic material.
This scenario can only be understood within the logic of a global hybrid war, where two clearly defined blocs clash. On one side is the organized crime bloc, made up of Latin American narco-terrorist regimes and their extra-regional allies, and on the other is the democratic bloc. It is not a replay of the Cold War, but it is a strategic confrontation with multiple dimensions.
Today, a visible change is finally emerging in concrete actions, such as Argentina’s decision to reject Chinese aircraft, which are unviable due to their technology stolen from the West, and opt for American F-16s. Such decisions already mark a shift that favors the return of private investment, technology, and Western presence in the region.
The region is beginning to react with a policy anchored in objective reality. It remains to be seen whether this shift comes in time to contain the deepening of the authoritarian bloc on the continent.
Diálogo: If current trends continue — the entrenchment of Venezuela as a criminal state, Iran’s expansion through proxies, China’s penetration into critical infrastructure, and Russia’s military alignment — what would be the most likely long-term scenario for the Western Hemisphere? Is the region heading toward fragmentation ruled by criminal actors or toward an intensified battlefield within the global conflict?
Sánchez Berzaín: The two things you raise are not a future scenario; they are already happening. It is not that it is heading in that direction; Latin America is already an area of global conflict and an area of criminal control not only by narco-terrorist states but also by extra-continental powers. This is not something that “will happen”; it is already happening, and in fact, it has been happening for five or 10 years.
Just look at the scope of Chinese investments, the equipment provided to armies by Russia, the Iranian bases, and the espionage systems installed in Cuban and Nicaraguan territory. Don’t present this to me as a future scenario; it is the present.
Now, with this geopolitical change, the immediate future does matter, and I will speak to you in concrete terms: In 2025, the Venezuelan people must be liberated through the defeat of the Cartel of the Suns. That is a goal with precise timing. And 2026 must be the year that the narco-terrorist groups that hold power in Nicaragua and Cuba are brought to an end. If that happens, then we will once again look at the Americas as they were viewed at the end of the last century.
The prediction that emerged at the 1994 Summit of the Americas, and which dominated the 1990s, was that the 21st century would be the century of full democracy, free markets, and development for the continent. But that did not happen. Instead of moving toward that horizon, we went from one dictatorship and five quasi-dictatorial governments to becoming a region defined by two stark realities: fragmentation governed by criminal actors and an intensified battlefield within the global conflict. Because that is Latin America today — we are permeated by insecurity, human trafficking, and political penetration with ill-gotten financing.
Diálogo: Finally, what would constitute a real turning point in the confrontation between criminal state actors and the region’s democratic and security architecture?
Sánchez Berzaín: The set of narco-terrorist dictatorships must disappear in the same way that progress is already being made. We are going to see a different Venezuela, because the law is being enforced. And the law, when appropriate, is enforced with the legitimate use of force. That is the central point.
