Strategic documents and policies, from the United States National Security Strategy down to the SOUTHCOM Commander's Posture Statement to Congress, recognize the role of economic development and liberalized trade in promoting global and regional security. However, domestic agricultural subsidies appear to negate or limit potential positive impacts of free trade agreements in the SOUTHCOM AOR. Two questions arise from this apparent disparity. First, are domestic agricultural subsidies detrimental to free trade and trade liberalization in the SOUTHCOM AOR? Second, what role should the Department of Defense, specifically the Combatant Commander, assume in shaping domestic issues which undermine national defense objectives within a given AOR? Academic research and historic data confirmed statistically significant positive relationships between trade liberalization and economic growth and between economic growth and stability. However, domestic policies which limit the ability of free trade agreements to increase regional stability do not necessarily threaten United States national security. The SOUTHCOM Commander should attempt to influence domestic policies that foster instability within his AOR when such policies threaten United States national security.

Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)