AMNA NAWAZ: This week, the Trump administration authorized a $20 billion financial lifeline for Argentina as#it faces a deepening economic crisis.

But the justification of the deal has raised major# questions and criticism about its merits.

John Yang helps to break it down.

JOHN YANG: Amna, the United States is# exchanging dollars for Argentine pesos## to prop up that currency, which has been losing# value recently.

President Trump announced the## move on Tuesday as he met with Argentine# President Javier Milei at the White House.

And he made clear that this# is contingent on Milei's party## winning legislative elections later this month.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the United# States: I'm with this man because his## philosophy is correct.

And he may win or# he may not win, but I think he.. win.

And if he wins, we're staying with# him, and if he doesn't win, we're gone.

JOHN YANG: In addition, Treasury Secretary Scott# Bessent has said the administration is trying to## secure an additional $20 billion for Argentina# through private banks and sovereign wealth funds.

Monica de Bolle is an economist at the# Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Monica, first of all, what's going on in Argentina## that makes this necessary or# they're trying to react to?

MONICA DE BOLLE, Peterson Institute for# International Economics: So Argentina is## facing the kind of problem that it# usually faces.

It's an economy that## functions with both the peso and the# dollar.

So Argentina is a partially## dollarized economy.

It uses the dollar# like -- as if it were its own currency.

And oftentimes what happens is that they# run into a shortage of dollars.

So whenever## they run out of dollars, they fall into# crisis, which is what's happening now,## and the U.S.

is stepping in to provide# the dollars that Argentina needs.

JOHN YANG: But, as you say,# this happens periodically.## This isn't going to fix it, is it?

MONICA DE BOLLE: No, it's not going to fix it## because the underlying problem that Argentina has# is precisely the fact that it uses two currencies,## rather than one.

So they have their own# currency, but they also use the dollar.

And that's what always trips them up.

So whenever# there is a shock of confidence in the system,## whether because of some domestic problem# that popped up or because of an external## or international problem, they run out# of dollars, they fall into trouble,## and then somebody has to step in to rescue them.

That somebody has usually been the# International Monetary Fund.

But as## we have seen in the past few weeks, now we# have the United States stepping in as well.

JOHN YANG: Is there a danger here# of this crisis spreading through## the region that the administration is# trying to stop, or what's at risk here?

MONICA DE BOLLE: So that's a very good# question, because the answer is no.

Argentina is not a country that poses# any risks to either its neighbors,## its surrounding -- the surrounding# countries, or to the United States,## or to the global economy.

Argentina is# not a systemic country in that sense.

So, in the past, when the U.S.

has acted in# sort of similar ways to what it's doing in## Argentina right now, it has done so because the# country in question was systemic.

In other words,## it had the potential of having# negative -- the crisis in the## country had the potential of having# negative consequences on others.

But this is not the case with Argentina right# now.

So there is no real economic rationale## for the United States to be stepping# in and doing this at this juncture.

JOHN YANG: No economic rationale.

The president# said this is contingent on President Milei's## party winning the legislative elections# later this year.

What is the president## trying to advance?

What interest is# he trying to advance by doing this?

MONICA DE BOLLE: He's trying to advance# two interests.

So, on the one hand,## he's trying to prop up what he sees as a# political ally.

So Milei is very much perceived## as a political ally of the administration.# So there's an interest in keeping him in## power and keeping him in office.

He still has# two years to go as president of Argentina.

And the other -- the other driving# motive here is geopolitical,## because China is very much involved# in Argentina.

It is actually very## much involved in the region as a whole.# Argentina has a lot of lithium reserves.## It also has a lot of rare earth reserves.# So there is an interest, the geopolitical## interest on the part of the U.S., in sort of# confronting China, so to speak, in the region.

So I see this move by the administration as being## completely geopolitical and political# in nature, not economic at all.

JOHN YANG: You mentioned China.

A lot of# soybean farmers in the Midwest are angry## because China stopped buying their# product because of the trade war## and are buying -- is buying soybeans# from Argentina.

They see them that## this is a lifeline being thrown to a# competitor.

What do you say to that?

MONICA DE BOLLE: Yes, it is problematic# because that is happening.

China has## stopped buying soybeans from the United States.# It's buying soy from Argentina and from Brazil,## which Brazil is the largest producer# in the region.

But Argentina also## produces a lot of grains and a lot of soybeans.

And China has just stepped up its purchases# of these products from both countries,## but notably in our case here Argentina.

So, yes,## U.S.

farmers have very much a right# to be angry at this situation.

JOHN YANG: You say there's no economic reason# why the government has to do this, the United## States has to do this.

Is there a risk# to the United States by doing this?

MONICA DE BOLLE: There surely is, because# this is the situation that the U.S.

is## walking into without any endgame in sight.# So, in other words, the U.S.

is stepping## in to provide a lifeline for Argentina,# but it doesn't really know how this ends.

And, with Argentina, the story usually goes# like this.

You lend to them.

They usually## don't pay back.

So you face a situation --# this is what's been going on with the IMF## for the past 20-something years.

And so what# happens is you either have to keep lending## to Argentina in order to keep them afloat# and in order for you to repay yourself,## or you stop lending to Argentina, in# which case you throw them into crisis.

So with the U.S., it's kind# of a no-win situation here,## because the moment the U.S.

steps in to# provide Argentina with this lifeline,## it either has to commit to staying in Argentina# and keep providing Argentina lifelines if it## faces further problems down the road, or the# U.S.

at some point will have to step back.

And when they do, Argentina will fall into a# crisis and guess who will be blamed?

The U.S.

JOHN YANG: Monica de Bolle# of the Peterson Institute## for International Economics, thank you very much.

MONICA DE BOLLE: Thank you.