Migration from Central America to the United States has increased, and according to a report published in March by the International Committee of the Red Cross, it is likely that in 2022 it will increase even more and the security problems for people trying to cross the border will worsen. between the American power and Mexico. Immigration has become a key issue for the United States and several surveys place it among the main problems facing Americans.
In the 2020 elections, there were reasons for optimism in Central America. This year, in the presidential campaign, Joe Biden pledged 4 billion dollars to address the causes of emigration in Mexico and in the countries of the Northern Triangle (El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala). The causes are multiple, but most of them have to do with the economic and social development of Central American countries.
The visits of Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Vice President Kamala Harris to Costa Rica and Guatemala, respectively, in June of last year could be interpreted as a sign of interest by the Biden administration in achieving this goal. The presence of Kamala Harris at the presidential transfer in Honduras on January 27 is also a good sign.
Previously, no US government had paid so much attention to the region’s economic and social development problems. However, there were also reasons for skepticism. As a panel of experts from the Inter-American Dialogue, headed by former President Laura Chinchilla, rightly pointed out, the Biden administration’s proposal had several limitations. Among them, the lack of a regional approach, which, as history has shown, is fundamental to understanding and facing the problems of Central America.
It is true that through public-private alliances promoted by the United States, efforts are being made to attract investment to the most affected countries. Several US companies expressed interest, facilitated by a nearshoring context. It is an opportunity, but it certainly requires public sector influence, through social policies in key areas such as education and health. Either way, the effects will be seen in the long run.
However, according to a note published by Time magazine last January, by mid-2021 only about $250 million of promised aid had been invested. It is unclear how and on what.
As experts from the Inter-American Dialogue have pointed out, 4 billion dollars is actually not enough for the dimensions of the region’s problems. Still, it looked like a good start. Despite this, it seems highly unlikely that this goal will be met by the end of the four years of the Biden-Harris administration. Especially if Democrats lose control of the Executive in November 2024.
The international context is one of the factors that lead to skepticism. Although since the beginning of the Biden administration, part of its foreign policy strategy has focused on the recovery of weakened alliances during the Donald Trump administration (2017-2020) with Western democracies, much of the attention has been directed to Southeast Asia, particularly China’s rise as a foreign policy priority.
But his assumptions had to change quickly. Unforeseen issues arose, such as the weakening of his image by the chaotic departure of his armed forces from Afghanistan. Furthermore, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is evidently an affront to its status as a hegemonic power.
Domestically, voters’ attention is focused on inflation, in the midst of the midterm elections in November. The structure of a bicameral political system, with presidential elections every four years, elections at other levels in half terms and a two-party system, already poses very complicated negotiations for a fragile ruling party in Congress. Thus, a long-term agenda for Central America will encounter difficulties with a US Executive that has short-term goals and global interests. However, a second Democratic administration would undoubtedly be advantageous.
This logic is mixed with Central American political problems. The US government has declared that it wants to prevent financial aid from falling on deaf ears, due to the deep corruption that is widely known. This is compounded by the authoritarianism that mainly affects Nicaragua and, to a lesser extent, El Salvador and threatens other political systems.
Although Nicaragua is not part of the promised aid, it complicates matters. The governments of Nicaragua and El Salvador responded with repressive measures against civil society organizations that should channel part of the economic cooperation of actors in the international community, such as the United States, towards social development projects. Let’s hope that other governments in the region do not follow suit.
Unfortunately, the millions of people who need these promises of economic and social development to be fulfilled are in the middle of the political game. Therefore, thousands will continue to try to migrate to the United States, even if they have to risk their lives.
At the moment, there is little information about the policies being implemented in this area. Let’s just hope that interest continues despite the debilitating factors, both conjunctural and structural, in the domestic policy of the United States and Central American countries, as well as in international politics.
