The analyst values El Salvador’s political crossroads and Washington’s clear concern about the country’s authoritarian course. Reporting threats to the rule of law, monitoring democratic institutions and fighting corruption will be key points.
The president of the influential Inter-American Dialogue Analysis Center, Michael Shifter, analyzes the dangerous spiral of authoritarianism in which El Salvador has embarked, with an authoritarian government dominated in form and substance by the figure of President Nayib Bukele .
As the head of this pulse-measuring tank of thought in the region, Shifter emphasizes the clear messages that the administration of President Joe Biden and much of the federal legislature, both Democrats and some Republicans, they have sent to the Bukele government. And there is no doubt that the gear of American diplomacy has begun to move pieces for work in the well-known North American Triangle, a region that remains a priority, but under clearer rules of the game.
Related topic: Bukele travels to Washington and no Biden government official wanted to receive him
This expert, who is also a professor of the Foreign Service degree at the prestigious Georgetown University in Washington, where he teaches a chair on Latin American politics, is an authorized voice to analyze issues in the region. Michael Shifter talks to El Diario d’Avui about the Salvadoran scene seen from Washington.
What can be said about El Salvador right now in Washington, with the new political scenario already consolidated and when the bets for the region have been unveiled?
The region in general is going through a difficult time. It was difficult before the pandemic, but it ended up getting much worse with the arrival of the Covid-19; as for El Salvador, there seems to be a growing concern for the government of President Nayib Bukele. While it is true that his level of support from the people in the country is remarkable, what began with some concern for his more authoritarian tendencies has grown a lot and is now a position shared by both Democrats and many Republicans in Washington.
On 9F President Nayib Bukele sat in the chair of the Speaker of the Assembly, played the gong and opened the plenary. / Photo EDH Archive
Are there any trigger points to outline this authoritarian figure?
The events of February 9, 2020, with the taking of the Legislative Assembly with the military, greatly influenced the perception that was already beginning to be held of Bukele. Then we saw the attacks on the independent media, which show little tolerance in a climate of democratic culture. The perception in the United States has gone with more concern about the authoritarian tendencies shown by the Bukele government.
Before Bukele won the presidential election, you pointed out that there were signs of wear and tear from bipartisanship in El Salvador and that you needed to pay attention to it in relation to other processes in the region. Is there any substantial difference between Bukele and other Latin American democracies that have had partisan system shocks?
A more nuanced analysis needs to be defined in the arguments of some analysts, who I think have defended Bukele by saying that what is happening in El Salvador should not be confused with other countries such as Nicaragua, Venezuela and Cuba, which moved to dictatorships and El Salvador for now is not a dictatorship, that is true; however, their anti-democratic behavior and against the rules and principles of the rule of law show worrying signs; throughout the time when both SAND and the FMLN were in power, there were never any signs like the ones we have seen with Bukele, despite many tensions and conflicts.
You may be interested in: Bukele vetoes declaring 9F as “Failed Coup”; Vargas responds: “Reality surpasses fiction and lies”
On February 28, the question of whether El Salvador will have an independent Assembly or one controlled by the Executive will be cleared. How do you think President Joe Biden’s administration will adapt to this new scenario?
It remains to be seen what happens with the election, but I think when it comes to Bukele, the Biden administration has sent very clear messages: the decision not to receive — when he came to Washington says a lot. It will be a challenge to redefine the relationship with El Salvador, it is obviously an important country for Biden’s policy in the region, but it will also be very clear that the issues of democracy, human rights, free press and the fight against corruption are already part of the agenda, which was absent for the past four years, with Donald Trump.
Joe Biden, President of the United States. Photo / AFP
What can we expect from Biden’s commitment to the Northern Triangle, knowing that these three countries are currently in different situations, especially in terms of democracy?
It is a region difficult to stratify; however, President Biden has a clear commitment to the North American Triangle, something he clearly showed when he was vice president. We know how much you care about what’s going on here. He will try to improve the conditions that are giving rise to irregular migration to the United States, but it will not be easy because economic and violent conditions throughout the region are difficult; they will have to make deep commitments and involvement in the region. No one doubts that it will take a long time, despite having that $ 4 billion to do so.
How much room for action does the U.S. government have to work in the region, given that the previous administration invested so much alone in the migration issue?
The United States is very important to Central America, those countries that are facing enormous challenges and challenges can achieve greater cooperation with the United States; which could improve conditions. In this sense, the US does have room for action, because countries want cooperation, but this arose with efficiency and firmness to ignore authoritarian governments, as we have not seen before, and signals such as not receiving President Bukele here and some comments on Honduras, it is a firm position that seeks to influence the behavior of leaders and these governments.
Besides that the region is almost tied to the northern power?
The United States has sufficient margins and resources, and the region is so clinging to the United States in all economic, cultural, migratory terms, in every way, there is no leakage, this country is big and strong and the Central American countries are boys and relatively weak.
And the influence of China, which has been seen as a shadow over the region?
I believe that China’s role is a permanent presence, first in South America and now in North America as well, and I believe that this presence should be a stimulus for the United States to improve cooperation with countries. and compete with China, because each country offers different things in different areas. So partners must be mobilized in the region to present a more attractive alternative than the Chinese.
How strong do you see the private sector in the current Salvadoran situation?
The private sector in El Salvador plays a key role; it must be clear enough about the importance of the social agenda, of improving the health system, education and other services that are not working well; it is clear that having a more open and democratic government suits the private sector because it generates conditions of stability, authoritarian governments generate many divisions and clashes, which is not good for the private sector. In El Salvador and other countries, a social pact must be sought, in which the private sector plays a key role.
Is there any estimate of the impact of the pandemic on the democratic weakening in the region, or is there still debt in this regard?
There are governments that have used the pandemic as a pretext to control power, and it is always advisable for governments to invoke an emergency, because this allows for more authoritarian specific measures to address that emergency; there has been some of that, the pandemic has been a factor in deteriorating conditions in the region and this has generated social discontent as well.