As the debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump approaches, I have been reminded of an episode I experienced in 1999 or 2000. At that time, as a senior Colombian diplomat in Washington, I was having a conversation with an important official from the State Department, in the framework of the work of the two governments to get the American Congress to approve resources for Plan Colombia, conceived at that time as a broad plan to combat the cultivation, production and trafficking of illicit drugs. Your situation in Latin America, he told me, is very paradoxical: the region is poor, but not as poor as other regions in the world, it is violent, but it is not a massive violence like in other parts and it is certainly not for religious or ethnic reasons, they do not engage in wars between countries and they definitely do not represent a high-level terrorist threat to us. The only thing that really worries the United States is the production and entry of illegal drugs — especially cocaine — into this country.
At that time, the taboo surrounding the discussion of drug legalization and its treatment through —primarily— education and prevention rather than interdiction was deeper, so the discussion took place in a very isolated manner.
A lot of water has flowed under the bridge in the last 25 years. The discussion about illicit drugs is different and the drugs themselves are different. Opioids have become a new scourge in North America, although cocaine remains predominant in the United States, Europe and Asia. There is less talk about cocaine and heroin anymore, and now the public discussion is about opioids, especially fentanyl.
Today, at the political level and especially in the campaigns, the big issue that worries the United States vis-à-vis Latin America is mass migration, unlike 25 years ago. And it’s not that it wasn’t on the radar before, but it wasn’t such a controversial issue and — above all — it wasn’t as politicized as it is today.
The arrival of undocumented persons, especially through the southern border, the form and magnitude of deportations (which includes these and removals or “removals”) is an issue that has been on the agenda of Harris and Trump during their time in the federal government, she as vice president and he as president. For Trump, the issue is more about the exercise of tough authority with the construction of his controversial wall, deportations in what he has promised will be “the largest deportation operation in American history” and restrictions on asylum. Harris, for her part, has been part of the execution of the Biden immigration agenda that many consider too soft. Rather than being in charge of operational control of the border, Harris has focused on working with countries — especially Central American ones — seeking to improve their conditions and thus discouraging the massive entry of undocumented people and supporting those who arrive. The results of this management do not seem to have been very convincing.
Knowing what’s happening outside means understanding what’s going to happen inside, so don’t miss anything.
KEEP READING
Multiple surveys show that controlling immigration is a priority issue for Americans, more so for Republicans than for Democrats, although it is generally not at the top of the list. According to a recent study by the Pew Research Center, the three priority issues are the economy with 81%, health care with 65% and Supreme Court appointments with 63%. This last issue is much more important for Democrats (73%) than for Republicans (54%); it should not be forgotten that the latter dominate this collegiate body, with six conservative judges against three liberals, which has major implications on issues such as abortion, the scope for the exercise of civil rights and eventually immigration.
Next comes foreign policy at 62%, violent crime at 61%, and finally immigration in sixth place at 61%, with a clear emphasis on Republicans (82%) and much less on Democrats (39%). Gun control policies, while lower on the list of concerns of American voters, are in seventh place at 56%.
All of the above leads us to fear the worst in the presidential debate. The only topic on the agenda —as far as Latin America is concerned— will be how to block migration, how to restrict or not the right to asylum and whether a hard or soft hand is what should be applied.
We won’t hear about how illegal migration is caused by such disparate causes as extreme poverty, political instability, persecution or climate change. The latter, by the way, is ranked tenth among voters’ concerns, according to Pew, with 37% overall, including 62% of Democrats and only 11% (!) of Republicans.
Nor will there be an elaborate approach by the candidates on whether there should be or not a plan to discourage illegal migration through joint cooperation, trade and sustainable development or a mixed approach, with rigid and pragmatic migration rules that bring order, but without ignoring the human drama behind each family that leaves their home to enter the unknown, in a country whose language they do not even know.
Gone are the days when Washington’s vision of Latin America was more comprehensive, starting with John F. Kennedy’s famous Alliance for Progress, which was cut short by his assassination in 1963.
Whoever wins, Washington will most likely continue to take Latin America for granted, even if there are a few “problematic” countries. The paradox of 25 years ago remains: the region is poor, but not that poor; it is violent, but not that much and not for religious or ethnic reasons; our countries do not engage in wars and invasions and neither do they represent a high-level terrorist threat. The great concern of the United States today is the entry of illegal persons into its territory. We will see this in the debate, in which there will surely only be “problematic” countries.punch lines” and very general approaches.
Everything seems to indicate that if Latin America wants to have a relevant and broad relationship with the United States, it will have to be worse off in order to be better off.
Follow all the information on the US elections at our weekly newsletter.
#Latin #America #worse