TheAURO Plan: Reindustrialization, Partnership, and Global Renewal
(Strategic Report Submitted to the President of the United States)
Charleroi, Belgium
April 28, 2025
To the Honorable
Donald J. Trump President of the United States
Subject: Submission of the Strategic Framework for the Tariff-Up Rebalancing Operation (AURO)
Your Excellency,
I have the honor to respectfully submit for your esteemed consideration the strategic report entitled "Integration of Partial Lifting of the Cuba Embargo into the Tariff-Up Rebalancing Operation (AURO)."
This document outlines a comprehensive roadmap aimed at consolidating the economic and geopolitical leadership of the United States in a rapidly evolving multipolar world. By integrating Cuba as a strategic logistical and production hub, AURO seeks to reinforce regional supply chains, counter extra-regional influence, foster hemispheric cooperation, and ensure a resilient and sovereign reindustrialization process.
It is with the utmost respect that I submit this framework, confident that it offers a timely and pragmatic contribution to the consolidation of American strategic interests in the emerging global order.
Respectfully,
Dr. Horacio Jesús Téllez Oliva PhD in Physical Sciences
Email: horacio.jesus@yahoo.es
Charleroi, Belgium
ExecutiveAbstract
The Tariff-Up Rebalancing Operation (AURO) presents a forward-looking strategy to reposition the United States' economic leadership within a rapidly consolidating multipolar world. Through the partial lifting of the Cuba embargo and the integration of Cuba into hemispheric logistical frameworks, AURO strengthens regional alliances, counters extra-regional influence, and lays the foundation for sustainable industrial sovereignty. AURO combines tactical protectionismwith constructive economic diplomacy, offering a resilient path for renewed American leadership based on sovereignty, cooperation, and strategic foresight.
I. General Introduction
Context and Objectives of the AURO Operation
Historical Ties Between Cuba and the United States
The Strategic Role of Cuba in the AURO Framework
II. Strategic Justification
1. Geographical and Logistical Advantage
2. Nearshoring Potential
3. Containment of Extra-regional Influence
4. Regional Stabilization
5. Constructive U.S. Leadership Image
6. Emerging Internal Conditions in Cuba
7. Modernization Needs of National Infrastructure
8. Agricultural-Industrial Development Potential
9. Trust-based Cooperation and Institutional Neutrality
III. Strategic Areas of AURO–Cuba Cooperation
1. Agriculture and Food
2. Biotechnology
3. Renewable Energy
4. Tourism and Services
5. Logistics and Ports
6. National Infrastructure
IV. Phases of Suggested Implementation
Phase 1: Launch and Evaluation (0–18 months)
Phase 2: Operational Deployment and Productive Partnerships (18–42 months)
Phase 3: Regional Integration and Consolidation (42–72 months)
V. Conditionality and Guarantees
Transaction Supervision and Legal Protection
Joint Audits and Oversight
Automatic Reversal Clauses
Respect for Cuba’s National Sovereignty
VI. Five-Year Impact Projections
Increase in Bilateral Trade
Reduction in Logistical Costs
Creation of Binational Employment
Improvement of the Migratory Climate
Net Fiscal Contribution
VII. Conclusion
Strategic Opportunity through Cuba’s Integration into AURO
Long-Term Vision for U.S.-Cuba Cooperation
VIII. Opportunity for BRICS and SCO Relations through Cuban Territory
Cuba as a Bridge for Triangular Economic Dialogue
Areas of Shared Action and Strategic Convergence
IX. DoctrinalPrinciplesforAURO’sSustainabilityina Multipolar Environment
Core Principles for AURO’s Sustainability
Symmetrical Distribution of Benefits
Institutional Neutrality
Balanced Inclusion of Global Actors
X. Demographics as a Strategic Vector in the New Commercial Order
Demographics as an Internal Market
Demographics as a Productive Force
Demographics and Negotiating Power
Demographics and Technological Sovereignty
XI. Strategic Parallel: Ukraine Conflict vs. AURO Commercial Operation
Comparison of Military and Commercial Dimensions
Lessons from the Ukraine Conflict Applied to AURO
XII. Additional Strategic Considerations and Scenario Updates
Loss of Global Trust
Redistribution of Global Trade
Emergence of New Agreements
Systematic Long-Term Isolation
XIII. Final Strategic Recommendation for the Sustainable Implementation of AURO
Combining Tactical Protectionism with Economic Diplomacy
Flexibilization of Tariff Policy
Clear Separation Between Ideology and Economics
XIV. Strategic Comparison: Perestroika (USSR, 1985–1991) vs. AURO (USA, 2017–2030)
Comparison of Strategic Approaches Between Perestroika and AURO
Lessons from Perestroika for AURO
XV. Revised Strategic Recommendation: Sovereignty, Emulation, and Long-Term Viability
Institutionalizing AURO
Respect for National Sovereignty of Partner Countries
Emulative Diplomacy and Quality Leadership
XVI. Institutional Stability and the Four-Year U.S. Electoral Cycle in Foreign Policy
Impact of the Four-Year Electoral Cycle on U.S. Foreign Policy
Need for Bipartisan Frameworks for Stability in Foreign Relations
Charleroi, Belgium – April 28, 2025
I. General Introduction
The Tariff-Up Rebalancing Operation (AURO), promoted by the Presidency of the United States, seeks to reposition the national economic and industrial framework within a rapidly consolidating multipolar architecture. In this context, the Republic of Cuba emerges as a key technical and logistical partner, capable of playing both a tactical and structural role in the strategic deployment of AURO.
Beyond the immediate present, it is crucial to remember that ties between Cuba and the United States have deep historical roots. During the American War of Independence (1776–1783), citizens in Havana collected and donated significant funds in gold and silver channeled throughSpanish General Bernardo deGálvez to support the Americanrevolutionaries against British rule. This little-known gesture stands as one of the earliest examples of hemispheric solidarity and proves that constructive cooperation is possible even between nations with different systems.
Likewise, domestic initiatives such as the so-called “Escambray Operation of the Jewels,” where Cubanfamilies voluntarilycontributed valuablesto nationalreconstruction, highlight the moral and symbolic power of civic mobilization around large-scale national efforts.
In today’s multipolar world, where countries shift alliances based on structural interests, a solid and fair U.S. proposal toward Cuba could generate not only bilateral benefits but also international trust. Such a step would be closely watched by global actors as a test ofthe United States’ willingness to lead through cooperation and mutual respect. A cathedral is not built in two days: the success of AURO will require vision, diplomacy, and long-term strategic engagement.
II. Strategic Justification
1. Geographical and logistical advantage:
Cuba’sphysicalproximitytotheU.S. mainlandallowsfor immediatereductionsof30% to 50% in maritime transit times and logistical costs. This makes it a strategic option for relocating logistical hubs from Asia to the Caribbean.
2. Nearshoring potential:
Cuba possesses a highly qualified workforce in sectors such as healthcare, engineering, and education. Combined with operating costs up to 40% lower than in Asia, it offers an immediate alternative for relocating industrial supplychains. Over 1.5 million active Cuban workers are available for technical training to meet international standards.
3. Containment of extra-regional influence:
The growing presence of China and Russia in strategic sectors in Cuba such as telecommunications, infrastructure, and defense can be counterbalanced through a productive economic cooperation framework with the U.S., based on mutual benefits and greater transparency.
4. Regional stabilization:
U.S. investment in Cuba’s productive sectors could increase Cuban GDP by 3% to 5% annually, helping reduce irregular migration flows to the U.S. and strengthening regional governance. Initial investments of $1.5 to $2 billion are estimated to generate a 2.5x multiplier effect on local employment.
5. Constructive U.S. leadership image:
By leading a transformation based on investment, mutual respect, and tangible outcomes, theU.S.would position itselfasthe hemispheric benchmark, contrastingwith centralized, and statist proposals from global competitors.
6. Emerging internal conditions in Cuba:
Since 2021, the Cuban government has legalized and promoted the creation of micro, small, and medium enterprises (MIPYMES), opening unprecedented space for the private sector. Over 8,000 MIPYMES now operate in key areas like food production, technology, services, and light manufacturing. This transformation brings in new economic actors able to interact more efficiently with international partners, including American firms. Furthermore, partial liberalization of dollar use and the development of new mixed-ownership models enhance Cuba's economic integration potential.
7. Modernization needs of national infrastructure:
Cuba’s transportation, road, rail, and digital infrastructure show accumulated deficiencies that hinder the development of a robust nationwide logistics system. This opens clear opportunities for U.S. investment in high-impact sectors such as highway rehabilitation, port infrastructure expansion, public transport, and telecom modernization. Required investments may exceed $4 billion over six years, with expected returns via engineering contracts, equipment supply, and medium-term logistics concessions.
8. Agricultural-industrial development potential:
Cuba has approximately 6.3 million hectares of arable land, much of which remains underutilized. With investment in infrastructure andtechnology, this land could become a medium-scale agri-industrial export platform. Mechanization, precision agriculture, and adapted logistics networks would enable integrated food production hubs to serve both domestic and regional/U.S. markets, contributing to food security and rural job creation.
9. Trust-based cooperation and institutional neutrality:
The long-term success of AURO’s strategic partnership with Cuba must begin on a foundation of mutual trust. It is essential to avoid the involvement of organizations widely perceived in the region as instruments of external control such as the Organization of American States (OAS) which many Latin American countries view as symbols of interventionism. This cooperation should be built on sovereign bilateral
agreements, independent verification mechanisms, and horizontal diplomacy, ensuring that no actor feels subject to historic asymmetries or external pressure.
These investments could be implemented in three successive stages:
1. Initial Stage (0–18 months): Technical studies, bilateral agreements, and deployment of critical infrastructure.
2. Development Stage (18–42 months): Implementationofpriorityprojects throughU.S. contractor involvement and local technical training.
3. Consolidation Stage (42–72 months): Expansion of integrated services and regional connection with North America’s logistics system.
Daily and field studies and discussions would allow for a clearer chronology and overview.
III. Strategic Areas of AURO–Cuba Cooperation
1. Agriculture and Food
a. U.S. Interest: Expansion of agricultural exports.
b. Cuban Capacity: Annual deficit of approximately USD $2.1 billion in agri-food imports.
2. Biotechnology
a. U.S. Interest: Joint innovation in healthcare and public-private partnerships.
b. Cuban Capacity: Three patented vaccines and internationallyrecognized leadership in tropical biotechnology.
3. Renewable Energy
a. U.S. Interest: Strategic replacement of fossil fuels and diversification of energy sources.
b. Cuban Capacity: More than 2,100 MW of identified solar and wind energy potential yet to be developed.
4. Tourism and Services
a. U.S. Interest: Expansion of hotel networks and development of sustainable destinations.
b. Cuban Capacity: Qualified human resources and established coastal ecosystems.
5. Logistics and Ports
a. U.S. Interest: Creation of a hemispheric distribution hub.
b. Cuban Capacity: Active expansion of infrastructure such as the ports of Mariel and Santiago de Cuba.
6. National Infrastructure
a. U.S. Interest: Investment in transport, telecommunications, and digital connectivity.
b. Cuban Capacity: High need for structural renewal and external technical cooperation.
IV. Phases of Suggested Implementation
Phase 1 – Launch and Evaluation (0–18 months):
a. Issuance of an executive order authorizing agricultural, pharmaceutical, and energy exports to Cuba.
b. Signing of framework agreements for logistical, financial, and health cooperation.
c. Deployment of bilateral technical missions to assess the condition of critical infrastructure and define the first logistical corridors.
d. Initial investment estimate: USD $500 million, focused on feasibility studies, agricultural technology, and port connectivity.
e. Estimated job creation: Approximately 5,000 direct and indirect jobs in both the U.S. and Cuba.
Phase 2– Operational Deployment and Productive Partnerships (18–42 months):
a. Installation of joint ventures in biotechnology, renewable energy, and light manufacturing.
b. Participation of U.S. companies in the rehabilitation of highways, rail hubs, and the electrical grid.
c. Development of Special Economic Zones (SEZs) with mutual incentives.
d. Cumulative Investment estimate: USD $2.5 billion.
e. Potential job creation: Between 15,000 and 20,000 positions across technical, operational, skilled labor, and logistics sectors.
Phase 3 – Regional Integration and Consolidation (42–72 months):
a. Gradual integration of Cuba into North American supply chains.
b. Direct connectivity with ports in the Gulf of Mexico and Florida.
c. Incorporation of financial services under U.S. Treasury regulations.
d. Promotionof medicaland scientific tourism linked to biotechnologyand tropical health.
e. Projected additional investment: USD $1.5 billion.
f. Consolidation of commercial networks with an estimated export value of USD $4–5 billion annually.
V. Conditionality’ and Guarantees
1. All transactions shall be conducted in U.S. dollars (USD), under the supervisionofthe U.S. Department oftheTreasury, reinforcingtheroleofthedollar asaglobalstandard of trade and financial stability.
2. Legal protection for U.S. investments shall be ensured through bilateral investment treaties (BITs) that include international arbitration mechanisms, designed to resolve commercial disputes under neutral jurisdiction and with binding outcomes.
3. Joint audits shall be carried out by binational technical commissions, with rotating representation and oversight, to guarantee transparency in the use of public-private resources and the implementation of standards.
4. Automatic reversal clauses shall be included in case of Cuba’s active participation in hostile military alliances, including the deployment of military infrastructure or weapons systems on the island by nations considered strategic adversaries of the United States.
5. The entire cooperation framework shall be based on strict respect for Cuba’s national sovereignty, with principles of mutual cooperation and non-intervention as nonnegotiable foundations of the bilateral relationship.
VI. Five-Year Impact Projections
1. Increase in bilateral trade: A cumulative volume exceeding USD $12 billion is projected, primarily in sectors such as agricultural exports, medical technology, industrial goods, and tourism services. This figure reflects both the demand potential in Cuba and the capacityofU.S. companies to respond efficiently with competitive supply chains.
2. Reduction in logistical costs: A 30% to 40% decrease in transportation and supply costs is expected for U.S. companies relocating operations from Asia to Cuba. The proximity of Cuban ports to the U.S. mainland reduces maritime transit times and fuel costs, while enabling just-in-time delivery logistics for key industries.
3. Generation of binational employment: The cooperation plan could create more than 25,000 direct and indirect jobs, spanning sectors such as manufacturing, logistics, construction, engineering, services, and legal consultancy. It includes jobs both on U.S. soil (in export logistics and business services) and in Cuba (in operations, technical support, and infrastructure projects).
4. Improvement of the migratory climate: A more dynamic and inclusive economic environment in Cuba could lead to a 25% reduction in irregular migration flows to theUnitedStates.Economic stabilityand jobcreationareexpectedto serveasdeterrents to migration, reducing pressure on U.S. border and immigration systems.
5. Net fiscal contribution: An increase in federal tax revenue is anticipated through corporate taxation, customs duties, and service tariffs arising from increased trade, investment flows, and the expansion of export-oriented U.S. companies.
VII. Conclusion.
The case ofCuba represents a unique windowofopportunityfor the United Statesto implement a hemispheric trade rebalancing strategy under the guiding principles of the Tariff-Up Rebalancing Operation (AURO). This is not a concession, but rather a pragmatic response to the challenges of a multipolar global economy.
A selective and structured cooperation with a neighboring country historically linked and now open to new formulas would allow the U.S. to reposition itself as a leading economic power without resorting to isolation or confrontation.
Cuba should no longer be viewed solely through the lens of traditional bilateral politics, but instead as a viable and strategic geoeconomic node, capable of supporting the consolidation of production networks, technology, energy, and regional services.
The partial and conditional integration of Cuba into the AURO framework could mark the beginning ofa new hemispheric cycle one where sovereignty, development, and leadership converge through a constructive vision led by the United States.
VIII. Opportunity for BRICS and SCO Relations through Cuban Territory.
The current multipolar international landscape cannot be ignored. Cuba already maintains active and established relations with countries from the BRICS bloc and the Shanghai CooperationOrganization(SCO), positioning it as apotential bridge for a triangulareconomic dialogue
Within the frameworkofAURO, weproposethecreationofa jointlysupervised international economic cooperation zone where the United States, Cuba, and companies from BRICS- or SCO-aligned countries can participate under clearly defined and mutually agreed-upon regulations.
Sectors such as clean energy, tropical biotechnology, resilient infrastructure, and digital commerce could serve as areas of shared action and convergence. This approach would allow the United Statesto reclaim strategic influence in the Caribbean without direct confrontation with global competitors, while promoting new economic rules based on cooperation rather than control
The message to the world would not be one of hegemony or domination, but of structured collaboration, where the United States acts as a regional trade facilitator, safeguarding its interestswhile establishinga newpositionofrelevanceand influencethrough constructiveand balanced proposals.
This initiative, observed globally given the historical context of U.S.–Cuba relations, would also serve as a test of credibility. A fair and pragmatic approach from the U.S. could inspire trust in other countries and attract broader participation in AURO. In a world where nations are gradually shifting alliances and testing alternatives to traditional power centers, proposing better conditions and demonstrating long-term commitment will be essential. A cathedral, after all, is not built in two days.
IX. Doctrinal Principles for AURO’s Sustainability in a Multipolar Environment
To ensure the long-term sustainability and legitimacy of the AURO framework, a set of nonnegotiable doctrinal principles must be adopted. These principles will not only define the operational ethics of the initiative but also reinforce the credibility of the United States as a responsible and strategic economic partner in a complex and evolving global order:
1. Full Sovereignty: No nation involved in AURO shall be subordinated, manipulated, or used as a geopolitical tool. All actions must recognize and respect the national sovereignty of participating countries.
2. Structural Transparency: There shall be no hidden clauses, conditionalities, or covert mechanisms. Agreements must be public, auditable, and mutually understandable byall parties.
3. Symmetrical Distribution of Benefits: Gains from AURO-related initiatives must be shared proportionately among stakeholders, avoiding exploitative asymmetries that could undermine cooperation.
4. Institutional Neutrality: The initiative should avoid the involvement of organizations with a historyof political interference or distrust in the region, such as the Organization of American States (OAS), to prevent ideological friction or rejection.
5. Periodic Review of Commitments and Outcomes: AURO should include a mechanism for regular assessments, allowing for recalibration of priorities and correction of imbalances in benefit distribution or implementation challenges.
6. Separation of Economy and Domestic Politics: Technical and commercial cooperation should not be made contingent upon the internal political or ideological systems of participating nations. Collaboration must be based on mutual respect, rule of law, and functional goals.
7. Balanced Inclusion of Global Actors: AURO must encourage cooperation with both traditional allies and emerging powers, avoiding exclusive dependencies that could compromise the sovereignty or flexibility of any party.
These principles should be integrated into every bilateral and multilateral agreement derived from AURO, forming the normative backbone of a new economic diplomacy model, rooted in respect, pragmatism, and shared development.
X. Demographics as a Strategic Vector in the New Commercial Order
Within the framework of a prolonged commercial and economic conflict such as AURO, demographics emerge as a growing strategic dimension. Over the long term, population dynamics directly influence economic power, industrial resilience, and international bargaining capacity.
1. Population as an Internal Market: Countries like China, India, and the African continent have populations exceeding one billion people. This demographic volume guarantees an internal consumption base capable of sustaining industries independently of foreign demand. U.S. companies risk losing competitiveness if they cannot access or remain active in these large domestic markets.
2. Population as Productive Force: Nations with a high percentage of young populations suchas Vietnam, Nigeria, or Indonesia offer sustained labor advantages over time. In contrast, the United States, facing demographic aging, will need to reinforce its workforce through strategic alliances, vocational training programs, and smart immigration policies.
3. Demographics and Negotiating Power: Densely populated countries hold greater leverage in setting trade and technological standards. India, for example, is already negotiating froma positionofregulatory strengthwith globaltech giants like Apple and Meta, based on its demographic size and digital potential.
4. Population Pressure as a Weapon: Massive migration flows, consumer movements, or humanitarian crises can be used intentionally or indirectly as tools ofcommercial or diplomatic pressure. In this context, Cuba with a small but highly educated and organized population can serve as a pilot platform for regional stabilization, provided it is economically integrated into AURO.
5. Demographics and Technological Sovereignty: The more a country educates and trains its population, the greater its capacityfor endogenous innovation. China and India are accelerating their technicaland scientific education systems. The United States must maintain its technological leadership by attracting global talent and investing in domestic STEM education for future generations.
In sum, demographics are not just statistics they are strategic infrastructure. Ignoring this variablewouldweakenthe long-termfoundationsofanycommercialdoctrine. AURO must embed demographic intelligence into its planning, fostering alliances that not only deliver market access, but also build future productive capacity and innovation ecosystems.
XI. Strategic Parallel: Ukraine Conflict vs. AURO Commercial Operation.
Dimension
Type of Operation
Triggering Actor
Main Opponent
Tools Used
Allies Involved
Opponent’s
Reaction
Systemic Escalation
Ukraine–NATO–Russia
Military Conflict
Military – territorial control and geopolitical influence
NATO expansion eastward
Russia
Weapons, troops, sanctions, cyber defense
NATO, EU, U.S.
Armed intervention, alliances with China and Iran
NATO fragmentation vs. Russia/China/Iran
Influence Networks
Structural Risk
Demographic Dynamics
Trade
Reorganization
Visible Changes
(2024–2025)
External Perception
Russia expands in Africa and Central Asia
Prolonged military instability
Millions forcibly displaced
AURO – U.S. Commercial War vs. China and Allies
Commercial – control of global flows and industrial repositioning
AURO: tariff increases to protect U.S. industry
China (with indirect support from BRICS and aligned nations)
Tariffs, subsidies, tech and financial blockades
U.S., G7, industrial allies
Retaliatory tariffs, bond offloading, deals with the Global South
China strengthens BRICS, the Belt and Road Initiative, and new pacts
U.S. commercial isolation without cooperative openness
China and India dominate markets by sheer demographic volume
Russia redirects exports to Asia, Africa, BRICS
EU seeks alternatives with China and Asia
Russia seen as strategic actor or aggressor depending on bloc
BRICS+ drives global trade shift without U.S.
Morocco surpasses Spain in U.S. trade; EU suspends retaliation
U.S. seen as reindustrializer or aggressive protectionist
Strategic Warning Note:
This parallel suggests that in bothmilitaryand commercial arenas, the world is moving beyond unipolarity. The emergence of a multipolar global order requires the U.S. to adapt rather than impose
A rigid or unilateral application of AURO without a long-term vision could seriously undermine the structural position of the United States in the global economy. Ignoring these emerging dynamics could lead to progressive relative isolation, loss of regulatory leadership, and diminished access to strategic markets
To remain viable, AURO must be accompanied by smart diplomacy, selective cooperation, and tactical flexibility, ensuring the U.S. maintains a position of functional hegemonic leadership within a shared and competitive global architecture.
XII. Additional Strategic Considerations and Scenario Updates
Given the highly volatile geo-economics context of 2025 and the accelerated restructuring of global trade, it is essential to incorporate the following warnings and recommendations to ensure the strategic consolidation of AURO:
1. Loss of Global Trust:
The rapid and unilateral imposition of tariffs could, in the medium term, erode the perception of the U.S. as a reliable player in the global trade system. The weakening of U.S. "soft power" in multilateral forums such as the WTO and the G20 could have negative consequences in future trade negotiations.
2. Redistribution of Global Trade:
Current signs in 2025 reveal a structural diversion of trade flows. Morocco has overtaken Spain in certain U.S.-bound exports, while China has strengthened its partnerships with the EU, Africa, and Latin America. U.S. participation in the new commercial architecture is being directly challenged.
3. Emergence of New Agreements:
BRICS+, the Digital Silk Road, and the CIPS platform for yuan-based payments are creating parallel systems that reduce dependence on the dollar and on Western financial institutions.
4. Systematic Long-Term Isolation:
If AURO does not incorporate elements of strategic cooperation, it could result in the gradualexclusion oftheU.S. fromkeyemergingmarkets, weakening itsexport base, technological competitiveness, and financial leadership.
XIII. Final Strategic Recommendation for the Sustainable Implementation of AURO
1. AURO must combine tactical protectionism with active and horizontal economic diplomacy, incorporating bilateral and trilateral alliances with Latin America, Africa, and Asia.
2. TheCuban modelcan only beconsidered replicableif theUnited Statesdemonstrates its ability to lead economic development processes based on full respect for the sovereigntyofeach nation. This means refraining from imposing politicalor ideological conditions, avoiding interference in internal affairs, and not conditioning economic relations onchanges to acountry’s internal political system. Only under these principles can the United States earn genuine respect and strategic influence within alternative blocs in the emerging multipolar order.
3. The progressive flexibilization of the tariff policy, through mechanisms such as Cooperative Economic Zones or Sectoral Thematic Treaties (biotechnology, lithium, tropical health), could prevent retaliations and expand spheres of influence.
4. It is vitalto clearly separate ideology from economics: technical cooperationchannels must be established with countries that, while not sharing the U.S. political model, are willing to cooperate under principles of mutual respect, reciprocity, and transparent rules. It is essential to avoid ambiguityor double standards that simulateopenness while pursuing unilateralbenefits, asthiscoulderodetheU.S.’scredibilityasareliable partner and undermine the strategic sustainability of AURO.
5. It is important to emphasize that many countries may initially accept the conditions imposed by U.S. commercial pressure, even approaching diplomatic extortion. However, this early adherence should not be mistaken for lasting or genuine support. As more balanced multilateral alternatives emerge such as those offered by BRICS+
or autonomous regional platforms these same countries could progressively disengage from the AURO framework, thereby weakening its structural reach.
6. This method of operating under pressure might project an illusion of early success, but if not supported by a fair distribution of benefits and genuine respect for national sovereignties, it could turn into a counterproductive strategy. The U.S. risks misleading itself regarding the true solidity of its trade alliances, and losing legitimacy as a trusted strategic partner.
7. Ultimately, AURO must build its legitimacy not only through commercial power, but through diplomatic coherence, strategic foresight, and the generation of sustainable and shared benefits.
XIV. Strategic Comparison: Perestroika (USSR, 1985–1991) vs. AURO (USA, 2017–2030)
Dimension Perestroika (USSR)
Leading Figure Mikhail Gorbachev
Geopolitical Context
Cold War / internal economic crisis / external military pressure
Official Goal Reform the Soviet system without dismantling it (more efficiency + openness)
Long-term commercial isolation; strategic allies’ withdrawal if cooperation isn’t redefined
Pending. Risk: structural weakening of U.S. commercial and normative leadership
Global leadership cannot rely solely on tariff pressure: shared legitimacy is essential
Strategic Reflection and Lessons for AURO
1. Continuity Beyond Leadership: Perestroika ended with Gorbachev. AURO needs bipartisan support and institutional continuity.
2. Avoid Coercion Optics: Gorbachev’s reforms were misread as surrender. AURO must not repeat this image.
3. Clarity and Legal Structure: AURO must be legally codified, with clear benefits and responsibilities.
4. Gradualism: Avoid abrupt shifts; AURO should proceed incrementally.
5. Trust and Partnership: Foster genuine alliances, not forced alignments.
XV. Revised Strategic Recommendation: Sovereignty, Emulation, and Long-Term Viability
1. Institutionalize AURO through bipartisan frameworks and public-private mechanisms.
2. Ensure full respect for national sovereignty of partner countries. AURO must not be coercive, but cooperative.
3. Present AURO as a long-term, credible alternative in a multipolar world, competing in stability, trust, and profitability with China and BRICS+.
4. Offer transparent legal guarantees, shared benefits, and fair arbitration mechanisms to build U.S. credibility as a trusted global partner.
5. Prioritize emulative diplomacy, avoiding hegemonic practices. The U.S. must lead through quality, not imposition.
6. Incorporate Southern Hemisphere cooperation models that promote resilience and stability beyond political cycles.
XVI.
Institutional
Stability and the Four-Year U.S. Electoral Cycle in Foreign Policy
The regular transition of presidential administrations every four years is a hallmark of democratic vitality and political dynamism in the United States. However, in the current geoeconomic context marked by accelerated global competition and more stable emerging blocs this model can represent a structural weakness for the coherence and sustainability of U.S. foreign policy.
Frequent leadership changes often lead to abrupt shifts in strategic orientation, undermining the predictabilityand credibility of the United States in the eyes of its international partners. While political alternationensures institutionalchecks and balances, it can also result inthe disruption of cooperation agreements, trade treaties, and investment projects that require long-term continuity.
In contrast, blocs such as BRICS+ and organizations like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) demonstrate greater consistency in foreign policy, even in the face of leadership changes. This stability is valued by many countries as a guarantee for establishing lasting, trustworthy, and mutually beneficial alliances.
To preserve its influence in a multipolar world, the United States should consider creating bipartisan frameworks that shield key pillars of foreign policy especially in Latin America and the Caribbean from internal electoral shifts. The partial depoliticization of economic diplomacy would enable the establishment of relations with sovereign nations based on shared strategic interests, rather than partisan agendas.
Failing to address this need for stability could result in progressive isolation, loss of trust in U.S. commitments, and, over time, the structural weakening of operations such as AURO. Adopting a more consensual, pragmatic, and stable foreign policy will be essential to maintain international relevance and domestic sustainability for the United States.
