This post was written with Diego Vega (main author), School of Political Sciences, University of Costa Rica
More indications lead to the conclusion that the good relationship that the president of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele had cultivated for a few months with US President Donald Trump, is not proving sufficient to maintain the support of the United States. On the part of the American authorities, and especially the US Congress, both Democrats and Republicans are increasingly expressing concern about Bukele’s controversial actions.
The president of El Salvador has been responsible for a series of questionable acts in the matter of human and constitutional rights, such as the episode in which he entered the Legislative Assembly accompanied by army officers to pressure the deputies to approve a public safety loan. With the arrival of the COVID-19 crisis, the president found a window of opportunities to deepen his controversial style.
Thus, on April 29 of this year, Representatives Eliot L. Engel and Albio Sires, both Democrats and members of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives, published a public letter addressed to Bukele in which they condemned his recent authoritarian actions and they urged to stop using the COVID-19 health crisis as an excuse to allow the excesses and misconduct of their management. They also called on the Attorney General’s Office to investigate any use of lethal force by the police authorities.
On September 3 Associated Press published that Thomas Kelly, vice president of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), warned the Salvadoran government that the assistance provided by that institution to fight poverty is at risk due to criticism, from Democratic congressmen and some Republicans as well, for Bukele’s defiance of Supreme Court rulings and congressional decisions. MCC is an independent agency founded by the US Congress and dedicated to providing economic assistance to developing countries.
Just the same day a report from El Faro—an online newspaper—came out showing government leaked documents. The Bukele Administration would have been negotiating with the Mara Salvatrucha 13—a youth gang—for a year in order to reduce homicides, and possible electoral support in the next elections in exchange to give greater prison benefits to the leaders and members of the gang.
In this context, the president challenged said media and described it as a “pamphlet”. On September 10, the head of US diplomacy for Latin America, Michael Kozak, showed on Twitter US support for the rule of law and freedom of the press in El Salvador. This statement was chanted by twelve Democrats who voiced alarm over attacks on press freedom, and on September 23 it was joined by six Republican congressmen.
So the tension between Nayib Bukele and the US authorities continues to escalate. This dissatisfaction of the North Americans with the president can be understood on four levels:
1. Concern about threats to democracy and human rights (Human Rights).
2. Concern about the consequences of the war on drugs.
3. Concern about the migratory flows of Salvadorans to the US.
4. Electoral competition for the 2020 general elections.
Concern about threats to democracy and human rights
The United States as hegemonic power has promoted its vision of democracy and human rights around the world. Nicolas Bouchet affirms that this is not a disinterested or disguised matter, but rather that the US has made explicit its interest in promoting democracy when this strategically helps to generate gains in the field of national security and in the economic sphere. Furthermore, at the ideological level, the defense of democracy echoes the ideas that gave rise to the American identity based on the liberal tradition.
It was with the coming to power of Jimmy Carter in 1976 that the hegemonic power made the promotion of human rights a core aspect of its foreign policy. In this framework, although attention is usually focused on the Executive Power, the US Congress has also played a decisive role in the consolidation of foreign policy in the matter.
Concern about the consequences of the war on drugs
El Faro’s findings on the negotiations are not entirely new, but already organizations such as the International Crisis Group suspected that, beyond official government policies with a punitive approach, Bukele’s success in reducing homicides could be due to an informal understanding between criminal organizations and authorities.
Concerns in this regard have probably been growing for some time and did not arise in early September this year. In an environment where drug trafficking is perceived as a threat to its national security the United States, as the hegemonic power, would seek to influence Central American governments by giving that fight before the drugs reach US territory.
Concern about the migratory flows of Salvadorans to the US
If the rule of law in El Salvador continues to weaken and if gangs and other elements of organized crime continue out of control, this will have a negative impact on the quality of life of the people of El Salvador. Therefore, they would have more incentives to continue migrating to the US. Such a possibility would conflict with the approach to harsh migration policies that Trump has sought to establish, where he negotiates agreements for Central American countries to take measures that make it more difficult for their nationals to migrate to the Anglo-Saxon country, in exchange for economic aid, to support tourism. and more favorable conditions for legal Central American workers in the US.
Electoral competition for the 2020 general elections
Hand in hand with the points explained, there is the last level of analysis: that of electoral competition for the 2020 general elections. At first, it might be thought that the interest of the US authorities in condemning Bukele’s actions has to see incentives to ensure the vote of Salvadoran Americans. However, according to Krogstad and Noe-Bustamante of the Pew Research Center, the populations from Central American countries in the US are very small, and in the specific case of Salvadorans, they correspond to only 3.9% of Hispanics.
A point of greater interest could be found in the incentives for Democrats to capture votes from people with progressive values. Throughout Trump’s administration, Democrats have accused the president of exceeding his functions, which has taken on greater weight as the 2020 general elections approach where he will be elected, not only the presidency, but also the representatives of the House and part of the members of the Senate.
In this context, the Democrats have tried to monopolize the defense of democracy against the supposed authoritarianism of the Republicans, for example, through the publication of the draft Law for the Protection of Democracy.
This perhaps explains why it was the Democratic representatives who initiated the calls for attention to the excessive acts of President Bukele. Then the Republicans joined them, possibly to dispute the speech in defense of democracy, promoted insistently from the US government.