China’s intelligence presence in Latin America is not an emerging concern — it is an established operational reality that U.S. southern flank strategy has chronically underweighted. Beijing has constructed a multi-domain intelligence architecture across the Western Hemisphere, combining signals intelligence facilities in Cuba, dual-use space infrastructure across five countries, commercial port control in Peru, and deep telecommunications penetration via Huawei and ZTE. Individually, each element carries discrete intelligence or logistics value. Collectively, they represent a layered ISR and power-projection posture that positions the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Ministry of State Security (MSS) to operate in and through a region the United States has long treated as a strategic rear area.

The Institutional Architecture
Understanding China’s intelligence operations in Latin America requires clarity on the actors responsible. The MSS, Beijing’s primary civilian intelligence service, functions as a combined foreign intelligence and counterintelligence organ with a mandate spanning traditional espionage, elite recruitment, and covert influence operations. It operates alongside — not subordinate to — PLA military intelligence elements. The two services maintain separate chains of command under the Central Military Commission; in practice, the division is operational rather than geographic. The MSS manages human intelligence and influence operations, while the PLA’s Aerospace Force and Information Support Force — reorganized in 2024 from the Strategic Support Force — run signals, space, and cyber collection.
Both institutions operate under the authority of China’s 2017 National Intelligence Law, which mandates that “any organization or citizen shall support, assist, and cooperate with state intelligence work” (People’s Republic of China 2017).
That legal framework is not incidental. It transforms every Chinese company, employee, and facility operating abroad into a potential intelligence asset upon state demand — a point that becomes structurally significant when Chinese firms operate the telecommunications backbones, port management systems, and space tracking facilities of U.S. partner nations.

SIGINT Infrastructure in Cuba
Cuba represents China’s highest-value collection node in the Western Hemisphere. The island sits less than 160 kilometers from the Florida coast, and its southeastern quadrant provides direct access to Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Gulf Coast military test ranges, and combatant command headquarters in Florida. In June 2023, Biden administration officials confirmed China’s access to spy facilities on the island — an admission initially denied by the Pentagon before NSC spokesman John Kirby reversed course days later, acknowledging the facilities had been operational since at least 2019 (Funaiole, Bermudez, and Jun 2024).
A 2024 CSIS analysis using commercially available satellite imagery identified four likely sites: Bejucal, Wajay, Calabazar, and the previously unreported El Salao complex near Santiago de Cuba. Bejucal, the largest, has undergone significant expansion including construction of a new radome consistent with radar or ELINT collection. El Salao, under construction since 2021, features a Circularly Disposed Antenna Array estimated at 130 to 200 meters in diameter — arrays of that scale have demonstrated collection ranges of up to 15,000 kilometers (Funaiole, Bermudez, and Jun 2024). CSIS further reported that U.S. intelligence had tracked personnel from Huawei and ZTE — both U.S.-government-blacklisted entities that form the backbone of Cuba’s telecommunications infrastructure — cycling in and out of the suspected signals collection sites (CSIS 2024a). The relationship between China’s commercial telecommunications presence and its intelligence facilities is not coincidental; it is structural, and it reflects the same military-civil fusion logic that governs Beijing’s infrastructure strategy across the region.

The Space Infrastructure Network
Beyond Cuba, China has constructed an archipelago of dual-use space facilities across the hemisphere. The U.S. House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party identified at least eleven China-linked installations in Argentina, Venezuela, Bolivia, Chile, and Brazil in its February 2026 report Pulling Latin America into China’s Orbit, concluding that the network is used to collect adversary intelligence and strengthen PLA warfighting capacity (Select Committee on the CCP 2026).
The most operationally significant installation is the Espacio Lejano Station in Neuquén, Argentina. Established under a 50-year agreement negotiated with President Cristina Kirchner’s government in 2014 and built by 2017, the facility spans roughly 494 acres and is operated by the China Satellite Launch and Tracking Control General (CLTC). At construction, the CLTC reported directly to the PLA Strategic Support Force. Following the PLA’s April 2024 reorganization, the CLTC and its overseas facilities — including Neuquén — transferred to the newly created PLA Aerospace Force under the direct authority of the Central Military Commission (American Security Project 2025). Argentina retains access to only ten percent of the antenna’s operational time; China holds exclusive control over firmware, personnel, and physical access. The Argentine government’s own Ministry of Foreign Affairs legal counsel warned in 2013, before the deal was signed, that Argentina would bear no authority to hold China accountable for activities at the site (3GIMBALS 2024). That warning went unheeded.
When Argentina’s Milei government sought to inspect the facility in April 2024, it found the compound operating entirely under Chinese protocols with no Argentine oversight mechanism in place. The facility’s 35-meter parabolic antenna operates in S-, X-, and Ka-bands — functions that are technically indistinguishable from counterspace targeting, satellite monitoring, and electronic intelligence collection. That China lacks a credible civilian-military firewall over the CLTC is not an interpretive stretch; it is the explicit design of military-civil fusion doctrine, and the April 2024 reorganization placed the facility’s operational chain of command directly under the CMC chairmanship of Xi Jinping.

Port Infrastructure and the Chancay Problem
Commercial port investment represents China’s most underappreciated intelligence vector in Latin America. In November 2024, Xi Jinping personally inaugurated the Port of Chancay on Peru’s Pacific coast — a $3.5 billion project majority-owned (60 percent) by COSCO, China’s state-owned shipping conglomerate. The port cuts approximately ten days off transit times between South America and China and was marketed as a commercial and diplomatic triumph for both governments (CSIS 2024b). The strategic implications are considerably less benign.
When Peru attempted in 2024 to renegotiate COSCO’s operational exclusivity, the firm threatened to withdraw entirely. Peru’s government — under pressure during a state visit to Beijing — capitulated, changed its own laws, and guaranteed COSCO’s exclusive operational control, stripping Peru’s regulatory body, Ositran, of oversight authority. A Peruvian court subsequently confirmed that Ositran had no legal standing over the port (Ellis 2026). The result is a strategically located deepwater port on the Pacific coast of South America, operationally controlled by a PLA-adjacent state enterprise, with no meaningful host-nation oversight mechanism.
In wartime, Chancay could serve as a resupply node for People’s Liberation Army Navy vessels operating in the Eastern Pacific — a contingency that former USSOUTHCOM commander General Laura Richardson raised publicly before her departure (Ellis 2024). The port’s AI-integrated management systems and telecommunications infrastructure, built by Chinese state-linked firms, generate continuous operational data flows that fall squarely within the collection mandate of the 2017 National Intelligence Law. Peru’s political volatility compounds the risk: with nine presidents in ten years, the governmental continuity required to enforce sovereign oversight of COSCO’s operations is structurally unavailable.

The Telecommunications Vector
No account of China’s intelligence architecture in the region is complete without addressing Huawei and ZTE’s telecommunications penetration. Despite the Five Eyes alliance’s public consensus — stated jointly by Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States — that Huawei equipment poses significant security risks, most Latin American governments have rejected pressure to exclude it from 5G core infrastructure (NBR 2024). Brazil approved Huawei participation in its 5G rollout despite its stated security partnership with Washington; Mexico partially excluded the company from network core elements near the U.S. border under political pressure, but Huawei remains embedded across central and southern Mexico (NBR 2024).
The 2017 National Intelligence Law provides the operative mechanism. It obligates all Chinese entities to cooperate with state intelligence collection upon request, eliminating any functional distinction between a commercial firm and a collection asset. Latin American governments that route government communications — even partially — through Huawei-built networks have accepted a structural vulnerability: China does not need to activate that collection capability continuously to benefit from it. The access exists, and its use is a policy decision, not a technical one.

Conclusion
China’s intelligence presence in Latin America is not aspirational — it is operational. The four vectors examined here are not discrete projects connected by coincidence. They are components of an integrated collection posture enabled by military-civil fusion doctrine, the 2017 National Intelligence Law, and a decade of Belt and Road infrastructure diplomacy that traded economic access for strategic positioning. USSOUTHCOM commanders have warned about this architecture for years, and those warnings have produced scant policy response. The Chancay port opened. The Neuquén facility operates without oversight. Huawei remains embedded in the networks of key U.S. partners.
Washington’s attention remains fixed on the Indo-Pacific — which is precisely where Beijing would prefer it. If the United States does not develop a credible counter-presence strategy in the hemisphere, one that offers genuine alternatives to Chinese infrastructure financing, the rear-area vulnerability that planners have warned about will not remain theoretical. A conflict in the Western Pacific will not stay in the Western Pacific if China’s southern flank architecture is allowed to mature unchallenged.

Sources
American Security Project. 2025. “Deep Space, Deeper Ties: Espacio Lejano as a Model for China’s Critical Infrastructure Playbook.” American Security Project. July 15. https://www.americansecurityproject.org/national-security-and-space/chinas-space-infrastructure-diplomacy/deep-space-deeper-ties-espacio-lejano-as-a-model-for-chinas-critical-infrastructure-playbook/
3GIMBALS LLC. 2024. “China’s Space Operations in Argentina Raise Strategic Concerns.” 3GIMBALS LLC. June 26. https://3gimbals.com/insights/the-strategic-role-of-neuquen-in-chinas-precision-strike-capabilities/
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). 2024a. “China’s Intelligence Footprint in Cuba: New Evidence and Implications for U.S. Security.” Washington, DC: CSIS. December. https://www.csis.org/analysis/chinas-intelligence-footprint-cuba-new-evidence-and-implications-us-security
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). 2024b. “The Geopolitics of Port Security in the Americas.” Washington, DC: CSIS. https://www.csis.org/analysis/geopolitics-port-security-americas
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). 2024c. “Managing Geopolitical Risk in Mexico’s ICT Sector.” Washington, DC: CSIS. https://www.csis.org/analysis/managing-geopolitical-risk-mexicos-ict-sector
Ellis, R. Evan. 2024. “Strategic Implication of the Chinese-Operated Port of Chancay.” Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College. November. https://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/SSI-Media/Recent-Publications/Article/3959936/strategic-implication-of-the-chinese-operated-port-of-chancay/
Ellis, R. Evan. 2026. “Peru’s Political Crisis Shows How China Could Militarily Use the Port of Chancay Against the US.” The Diplomat, February 26. https://thediplomat.com/2026/02/perus-political-crisis-shows-how-china-could-militarily-use-the-port-of-chancay-against-the-us/
Ellis, R. Evan. 2026. “China’s Military Is Planning for Combat in Latin America.” The Diplomat, January 3. https://thediplomat.com/2025/12/chinas-military-is-planning-for-combat-in-latin-america/
Funaiole, Matthew, Joseph S. Bermudez Jr., and Jennifer Jun. 2024. “Secret Signals: Decoding China’s Intelligence Activities in Cuba.” Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies. July. https://features.csis.org/hiddenreach/china-cuba-spy-sigint/
National Bureau of Asian Research (NBR). 2024. “A Concise Guide to Huawei’s Cybersecurity Risks and the Global Responses.” Seattle: NBR. https://www.nbr.org/publication/a-concise-guide-to-huaweis-cybersecurity-risks-and-the-global-responses/
People’s Republic of China. 2017. National Intelligence Law of the People’s Republic of China [中华人民共和国国家情报法]. Beijing: Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress.
Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. 2026. “Pulling Latin America into China’s Orbit.” U.S. House of Representatives. February 27. https://chinaselectcommittee.house.gov/media/reports/pulling-latin-america-into-china-s-orbit