What Bolívar Would Say About BRICS, Trump, and Chinese Investment

Simón Bolívar died in 1830—long before BRICS, before Trump, before China's rise. But he left extensive writings on sovereignty, foreign powers, and regional unity. What would he make of today's world?

This is a thought experiment, not historical fact. But Bolívar's documented views offer suggestive guidance for how he might have approached contemporary challenges.

On the United States

Bolívar's most famous prophecy concerned American power:

"The United States appears destined by Providence to plague America with misery in the name of liberty."

This wasn't anti-American prejudice—Bolívar initially admired the U.S. republic. But he came to understand that American interests and Latin American interests were not aligned. The Monroe Doctrine, ostensibly protecting Latin America from European interference, also established U.S. hemispheric dominance.

On Trump: Bolívar would likely see Trump's Panama Canal threats and Venezuela intervention as confirmation of his fears. He would argue that these actions prove Latin America cannot trust U.S. benevolence—only collective strength provides security.

On Foreign Investment

Bolívar was pragmatic about foreign capital. He sought British loans to fund the liberation wars. But he was wary of dependence:

"We must not rely on foreign assistance for our own salvation."

On Chinese Investment: Bolívar would likely accept Chinese money while maintaining wariness. Use foreign capital to build infrastructure, yes—but don't become so indebted that Beijing dictates policy. Diversification, not dependence, would be his counsel.

On BRICS

Bolívar dreamed of a Congress of Panama that would unite Latin America and provide collective voice in world affairs. BRICS serves a similar function—giving emerging powers a platform outside Western-dominated institutions.

"A great confederation of peoples... would balance the whole world."

On BRICS membership: Bolívar would likely see BRICS as a useful tool—not an end in itself, but a means to balance against U.S. hegemony. He would caution against exchanging American dominance for Chinese dominance. The goal is autonomy, not new dependencies.

On Regional Integration

This is where Bolívar's views are clearest:

"Unity must save us, just as division will destroy us if it is introduced among us."

Bolívar spent his life arguing that fragmented Latin American states would be vulnerable to foreign domination. Only unity—first Gran Colombia, then broader Latin American confederation—could provide security and prosperity.

On Petro's Proposal: Bolívar would almost certainly support it. A confederation of autonomous nations, coordinating on defense, trade, and foreign policy? That's what he spent his life fighting for.

The Bolivarian Synthesis

If we reconstruct Bolívar's likely position from his documented views, it might be:

1. Distrust the United States. American power serves American interests, not Latin American ones.
2. Use foreign investment carefully. Take Chinese money if it builds useful infrastructure, but don't become dependent.
3. Engage BRICS pragmatically. Use it for leverage, not ideology.
4. Prioritize regional unity above all. A confederation of Gran Colombia nations would have more autonomy than four isolated states.

The Liberator died believing he had "plowed the sea"—that his work was futile. But his ideas survived. Two centuries later, they remain the most coherent framework for Latin American independence.