Category: Central and Latin America

Fact Sheet

President: Ariel Henry 

Capital: Port-au-Prince

Population: 11.4 million (2020)

Languages: Haitian Creole and French

Government regime: Semi-Presidential Republic
GDP per capita: $1,176.76

Freedom level: 37/100

History of US-Haiti Relations

The United States has shared an extensive history with Haiti since the island, then called Saint-Domingue, was under French colonial rule. In the 18th century, Saint-Domingue was France’s most profitable colony due to its high levels of sugar, indigo, and coffee production, and the United States served as the island’s second largest trading partner (after France). Enslaved Africans, whose labor fueled Saint-Domingue’s agriculture industry, eventually grew tired of the abuses they suffered from the French. Consequently, the Haitian Revolution began in 1791 under the leadership of Toussaint L’Ouverture and Jean-Jacques Dessalines, culminating in 1804 with the formation of Haiti. With the former slaves in control of the island, Haiti became the first Caribbean nation to achieve independence and the first modern state to abolish slavery. Despite freeing themselves from direct French colonial rule, inhabitants of the island were obligated to pay reparations to France if they hoped their newfound nation would be granted diplomatic recognition. 

The United States government did not acknowledge the Haitian Revolution out of fear that its own enslaved workers would revolt in the South. Despite the American refusal to acknowledge Haiti as a sovereign nation, the United States continued to import Haitian agricultural products and exported its own goods to Haiti. It was not until 1862, after the South seceded, that the United States officially recognized Haiti. In the following year, diplomatic relations and the American Legation in Port-au-Prince were established.

The following decades in Haiti were characterized by significant political turmoil, a high presidential turnover rate, and violence. These dynamics were widespread throughout Latin America at this time. In response, the U.S. enacted the Roosevelt Corollary, which enabled Washington to use military force in the Western Hemisphere to restore political stability. Such circumstances, along with the fear that German influence was encroaching on the Caribbean at the beginning of World War I, led President Woodrow Wilson to send U.S. Marines to the island in 1915. Wilson approved the invasion with the hope that the U.S. could reshape Haiti’s government, assist with the formation of a national army, and strengthen Haiti-U.S. economic ties. During its occupation, the United States assumed control of Haiti’s security and finances and imposed racial segregation, forced labor, and press censorship. In addition, U.S. forces deposed Haitian presidents and legislatures that opposed their presence. Consequently, rebellions against the U.S. administration in Haiti erupted, resulting in the deaths of thousands of Haitians. After 19 years of occupation, the U.S. Marines withdrew from the island in 1934, and Haiti regained its sovereignty. The American government’s decision to withdraw troops was linked to the Good Neighbor Policy, which reversed previous interventionist policies and declared that no state has the right to intervene in another’s affairs.

After the U.S. withdrawal, Haiti experienced a series of unstable governments, culminating in 1957 with a 29 year dictatorship under Francois Duvalier and his son Jean-Claude. During the reign of the Duvaliers, corruption and human rights violations ran rampant, resulting in the disappearances and/or deaths of approximately 30,000 people. Despite this, the United States continued to support the Duvalier regime out of fear that communism would spread to Haiti. In 1986, massive protests and international pressure forced Jean-Claude Duvalier to flee the nation. With the Duvaliers gone, Haiti had the opportunity to develop its own constitution and establish democratic institutions. 

The nation’s first elections took place in December 1990, and were won by a Catholic priest, Jean-Bertrand Aristide. In February 1991, he took office; later that year, he was overthrown. Aristide remained in exile for three years, returned to Haiti in 1994, and finished out his term in 1996. The United States occupied Haiti from 1994 to 1997 and claimed its goal was to restore peace and democracy in the island nation. In 2000, Aristide won a second presidential election, and Haiti was once more fraught with instability. In 2004, the American and Haitian militaries exiled Aristide to South Africa. Soon after, the United Nations began a peacekeeping mission in Haiti aimed at restoring order, which would last 13 years. 

Since then, Haiti has continued to face political turmoil and corruption. Haitians have demanded their leaders resign and have participated in mass protests, often against alleged U.S. involvement. The role of the United States in Haiti has been further called into question following the July 2021 assassination of then-President Jovenel Moïse. Before his death, Moïse’s opponents claimed that his presidency should have ended in February 2021 because he won the 2015 election, though it was later nullified. Moïse’s supporters, on the other hand, argued that Moise’s five-year term started following the 2016 election, meaning that it was not supposed to end until February 2022. Despite these allegations of political illegitimacy, President Moïse was supported by the Trump administration. It has come to light that some of the perpetrators of the Haitian president’s assassination had received U.S. military training. 

In addition to its political problems, Haiti has been struck numerous times by natural disasters, notably hurricanes, often worsening the country’s economy and pushing Haitian citizens to flee their homeland. The Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations have all been confronted with questions of how to restore order in Haiti, encourage development, and tackle migration issues.

U.S. Strategic Interests in Haiti

Political Instability

Since colonial times, Haiti has experienced bouts of political instability on its journey to sovereignty and democracy. These goals have been prevented by foreign intervention and corruption. The recent assassination of Moïse has exacerbated the nation’s downward spiral with violence and criminal activity exploding. Critics claim that the United States’ response to the assassination was underwhelming. The Biden administration decided against providing additional military assistance to Haiti in the midst of the chaos. Despite this, President Biden appointed a new special envoy to Haiti to coordinate the United States’ response to Haiti’s present situation. Some U.S. congressmen, on the other hand, have demanded that the U.S. intensify its efforts to provide support and assistance to Haitian security forces until elections take place. However, the Haitian elections have been postponed indefinitely, and it remains to be seen when and how the Haitian political conflict will be resolved. 

Development

Once a thriving colony, Haiti has become the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere, largely as a consequence of the reparations the island was forced to pay to the French along with numerous foreign interventions and corruption. Currently, the majority of the Haitian population lives below the poverty line. Much of the population is reliant on subsistence farming for survival, but such customs are threatened by the frequency of natural disasters, which destroy land, intensify worsening economic conditions, and exacerbate health crises. In efforts to improve conditions on the island, the United States has frequently provided humanitarian and development assistance. The amount of foreign aid often varies with the administration. For example, the Trump administration cut the amount of aid USAID could allot to Haiti, which has since changed under President Biden. In January 2021, the Biden administration announced that it was going to send an additional $75.5 million in development aid and health assistance to Haiti. Following a devastating hurricane in August 2021, Biden approved another $32 million devoted to disaster relief. 

Migration

As a result of deteriorating economic and living conditions, numerous Haitians have fled to nearby Latin American and Caribbean nations as well as the United States. Though the number of migrants fluctuates year to year and often spikes after hurricanes strike the island, immigration continues to be a crucial aspect of the U.S.-Haiti relationship. In recent years, the United States government has extended Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to Haitian nationals. TPS is often granted to migrants from nations suffering from political turmoil or natural disasters wishing to remain in the United States until the situation in their homeland improves. Following the 2010 earthquake, for example, the Obama administration extended TPS to Haitians who were living in the United States prior to January 12, 2010. To prevent mass migration, Haitians who arrived after the designated date were sent back. The Trump administration denied an extension of TPS for Haitians, leading to the deportation of thousands. Due to Haiti’s instability and political challenges, however, the nation’s TPS designation was extended multiple times, preventing Trump from completely terminating it. 

Though President Biden has revived TPS for Haitians, he has also upheld Title 42, which permits the Director of the Center for Disease Control (CDC) to prohibit the introduction of individuals to the United States if it believes there is a considerable risk for the spread of a communicable disease. Title 42 was issued in March 2020 in response to the spread of the coronavirus (COVID-19). This decision has led to thousands being turned away at the southern border, including Haitian asylum seekers, who are often being expelled to Mexico.

Fact Sheet

• President: Luis Abinader
• Capital: Santo Domingo  
• Population: 10.47 million 
• Language: Spanish 
• Government regime: Democratic Republic   
• GDP per capita: $7,268.19 
• Freedom level: 67/100

History of US-DR Relations

Christopher Columbus first set foot on the island of Hispaniola, which is now the D.R. and Haiti, in 1492. The island was colonized and split into two nations, Haiti in the west and the D.R. in the east, in 1697 by France and Spain, respectively. Haiti gained its independence from France in 1804, and conquered the Dominican Republic in 1822, ruling it for 22 years. In 1844, the Dominican Republic gained its independence from Haiti. In 1858, President Pedro Santana believed that re-annexing the D.R. to Spain would allow the country to thrive. This was a highly unpopular decision and the Dominicans revolted against Spain. From 1863 to 1865, the Dominican Restoration War took place against Spain, and the Dominicans retook the country.

The United States and the Dominican Republic (D.R.) began an official diplomatic relationship in 1884. At this time, the United States was primarily interested in the Dominican Republic as a stable, democratic trading partner. 

At this time the D.R.’s economy began to improve, but mainly through European loans, and the country accumulated a heavy debt burden which it was not able to pay back. The United States intervened on behalf of the D.R. because President Franklin D. Roosevelt was focused on maintaining influence in Latin America through the Roosevelt Corollary. He wanted to prevent European influence or occupation in Latin America due to the region’s proximity to the United States. He used what is now known as Big Stick Diplomacy – the idea that negotiating with countries and having a powerful, unspoken threat of military backing would keep European forces out of the region. Under this proposition, Roosevelt sent U.S. troops into the Dominican Republic and other Latin American and Caribbean countries, occupying the D.R. in 1916. This occupation was met with heavy criticism by the citizens of the Dominican Republic, leading the U.S. to leave in 1924.

From 1930 to 1960, Rafael Trujillo ruled as the Domincan Republic’s dictator and military strongman. His 1961 assassination led to a tumultuous period of military coups and civil unrest. The U.S. became concerned that a communist regime would emerge on the island. In April 1965, the U.S. sent 22,000 troops to the Dominican Republic, leading to the 1965 Dominican Republic civil war.

Since the end of the civil war, the Dominican Republic has been a relatively stable democracy and developed a stronger relationship with the United States. Although the nation still struggles with poverty and human rights violations, it has made steady progress and proved to be a strong ally of the U.S. in the region.

U.S. Strategic Interests in the D.R.

• Trade: The D.R. and U.S. recently signed the Dominican Republic Central America United States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR) in 2007. This trade agreement encompasses many countries in the region, including Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua. The goal under this agreement is to eradicate tariffs, allow trade to become more free and open, and give the countries more access to industrial and cultural products. When the agreement was signed in 2007, the D.R. exported 57.4% of its goods to the U.S. and imported 44.9% of its goods from theU.S.. Today, 53.8% of the Dominican Republic’s exports go to the U.S., while the 49.6% of D.R. imports come from the U.S.. The two countries’ proximity allows for cheap, efficient trade. 
• Security and the War on Drugs: Under the Obama Administration in 2010, the U.S. and the D.R. signed the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI). The CBSI’s primary goal is to provide funding to Caribbean countries to curb illegal drug trafficking, facilitate citizen safety, and encourage local governments and law enforcement agencies to prevent crime. In June 2021, Congress passed the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative Authorization Act which approved $74.8 million USD to CBSI for each fiscal year between 2022 and 2026. The Dominican Republic is expected to get approximately 23% of that funding, which is the highest amount any country receives under this initiative. In past years, a significant portion of this funding has gone to officer training, public outreach, maritime responses, and other preventative measures within the Dominican Republic. 

The Andean region is a geopolitical area encompassing the states through which the Andes mountain range runs–Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru–who share cultural characteristics initially spread by the Incan Empire in pre-colonial times. 

The region is economically characterized by membership in the Andean Community Trading Group, which includes Chile, Colombia and Venezuela, in addition to the three countries. The group was created with the objective of developing a customs union and fostering industrial development. Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru’s economies are also characterized by reliance on trade with the US, which makes up around 40% of total trading. The Andean region has faced many of the same challenges as its neighbors, including supporting large populations of Venezuelan migrants and refugees as well as concerns about electoral fraud and government corruption. Peru and Ecuador have served as a major destination for Venezuelan migrants. Like much of Latin America, the Andean states have suffered substantially from government corruption and fraud. More recently, major government efforts have implemented anti-corruption programs. It is difficult to say whether these programs are in truth anti-corruption or simply attempts to jail political opponents on false charges, but anti-corruption and anti-fraud are of high public interest.

US interests in the Andean region are diverse, but many come back to anti-drug production and trafficking efforts. Coca cultivation has been an indigenous practice in this region for many centuries for medicinal purposes and cultural practices; however, as the global market for cocaine has become more lucrative, this cultivation has increasingly shifted towards supplying the Global North with narcotics. US foreign policy in the Andean region has been characterized by efforts to reduce coca cultivation and eliminate drug trafficking.

Republic of Bolivia

• Capital: La Paz (government and executive capital), Sucre (constitutional capital)
• Population: 11.85 million (2020)
• Government type: Presidential Representative Republic 
• GDP per Capita: $3,552
• Official National Language/s: Spanish, several dozen indigenous languages (including: Aymara, Quechua, Chiquitano and Guaraní), Bolivian Sign Language
• Majority Religion/s: Roman Catholicism (many practice a version blended with traditional indigenous practices)
• Global Freedom Score: 66 (partly free)

US History with Bolivia

Bolivia has not always been a country of key diplomatic importance for US foreign policy because of its small economy and lack of raw materials of interest. However, relations with the US are essential for Bolivia due to its economic dependence on the United States. 

The US offered Bolivia official diplomatic recognition in 1848, several decades after many other Latin American countries. After beginning an official relationship, the United States and Bolivia’s relations have been largely characterized by a US focus on extractive industries and primary products production in Bolivia, similar to the rest of the developing world. Late 19th century relations between the countries were also characterized by the Monroe Doctrine, which officially declared US protection for Latin American countries against European intervention. In practice however, actions taken under the Monroe Doctrine were more in line with specific US interests in the region, so smaller countries like Bolivia did not receive much protection or aid. Specifically, the country unsuccessfully campaigned for US assistance to gain access to the Pacific Coast. 

Despite initial disinterest in Bolivia, commercial importance of Bolivian markets increased at the end of the 19th century as US businessmen realized the potential of this market to sell their goods. This led to the US government beginning to take a more concrete foreign policy approach towards Bolivia starting in the early 20th century. The US aimed to reform Bolivia’s economic and political institutions to better facilitate US investment. However, these interests were challenged with the rise of economic nationalism in the 1930s which led to the nationalization of foreign oil holdings. 

The Bolivian Revolution in the 1950s further distanced Bolivia from US commercial interests. The populist movement under the Revolutionary Nationalist Movement Party (MNR) pushed for better labor standards for miners and other workers and successfully advocated for further nationalization. These efforts were particularly focused on mining companies, many of which were at least partially owned by foreign firms. These actions led to large losses to US foreign investment in Bolivia. At the same time, the US government continued to push for US economic interests in the country. US aid flows to Bolivia gave the United States some leverage over Bolivia’s economic policies and economic advisors pushed for a cut to the Bolivian government’s budget and money supply. Ultimately these efforts were largely unsuccessful and the Bolivian government continued to implement populist economic policies, including nationalization of major industries. As a result, coca production increased as unemployment among lower classes increased. The bulk of this coca was used in cocaine production for US and European markets. Despite economic setbacks, the United States continued its support of Bolivia. In the early 1960s, the US Alliance for Progress resulted in an increase in US economic and military assistance to Latin America. However, the Bolivian government nationalized Gulf Oil, a major US oil company in 1969 and 2 years later forced the US Peace Corps out of the country.

With the onset of the US’s War on Drugs policy in the 1980s that reached all throughout Latin America, including Bolivia, the US pushed for stronger coca production regulation, arguing that existing laws were too relaxed. 

Key US Foreign Policy Considerations

Major current US foreign policy considerations in Bolivia concern coca production and sale. The rise in cocaine sales and use in the United States led to the War on Drugs, which began in the 1980s. US policy makers continue to advocate for decreasing coca production throughout Central and South America and in Bolivia particularly. Due to coca’s importance both to local economies and indigenous practices, these efforts have not been as successful as US policy makers have hoped. The beginning of Evo Morales’ presidency in 2006 further moved coca policy away from US interests. Evo Morales was the first indigenous president and a former coca growers union leader. He relaxed policies appeasing the US War on Drugs and separately made efforts to decrease economic dependence and pressure from the US government. Unlike the United State’s desire to completely eliminate coca production (to control cocaine production and sales to the US), Morales also kept coca growing legal and addressed US concerns with regulatory measures. As a result, the United States has not supported Morales’ presidency. In 2008, the US ambassador was accused of conspiring against the acting government and expelled. At the same time, the US Drug Enforcement Administration in Bolivia was suspended due to disagreements about coca production policies within the country. 

US concern about Morales’ leadership came to a head again in 2019 when the election result leading Morales to win his fourth term of office was scrutinized as fraudulent. When demonstrations ensued, Morales organized roadblocks preventing food from reaching major Bolivian cities. These actions relate to a different US interest in the region: promoting democracy and free and fair elections. Election fraud and corruption are common issues throughout Latin America. The prevalence and size of the US financial system means that the United States is often unintentionally involved in issues of money laundering and bribes. In May of 2021, the United States government charged former Bolivian Interior Minister Murillo with corruption for receiving bribes from a US businessman and using the US financial system to launder these bribes.

REPUBLIC OF ECUADOR

• Capital: Quito
• Population: 17.64 million (2020)
• Government type: Presidential, Unicameral Representative Democracy
• GDP per Capita: 6,183 US dollars (2019)
• Official National Language/s: Spanish (many people also speak Quechua)
• Majority Religion/s: Roman Catholic
• Global Freedom Score: 67 (partly free)

US History with Ecuador

US diplomatic relations with Ecuador first began when Ecuador was part of Gran Colombia (known at the time as the Republic of Colombia but encompassing present-day Colombia, Venezuela, Panama, Ecuador, and parts of Peru and Brazil) and continued after Gran Colombia dissolved in 1831. Over the past two centuries, Ecuador-US relations have primarily centered around implementation of War on Drugs policies and economic interests.

The War on Drugs began around the 1980s and Ecuador was a location of key interest for the United States. Ecuador contained the main drug route on which drugs were illicitly transported from Peru to Colombia. During the 1980s and 1990s, the US supported Ecuadorian authorities in increasing enforcement measures against criminal drug groups. Issues with criminal organizations in Ecuador continued into the 21st century and the United States has provided aid to train the Ecuadorian army and police as well as seal borders with neighboring countries.

US-Ecuador relations worsened in the late 2000s as political parties to the left gained influence over the government and President Correa was elected in 2006. Correa’s politics leaned towards socialism and weren’t aligned with US interests. To the US’s dismay, he implemented policies to gain economic independence from the US and also made efforts to initiate closer relations with Russia, the EU and China. In 2007, the Ecuadorian government under Correa began passing new legislation to restrict US companies present in the country. Taxes for oil trading companies were increased and lawsuits were filed against Chevron and Texaco for over one billion dollars in damages (including pollution, health detriments, and environmental damage).

In 2013, US-Ecuador relations were further complicated by a completely separate incident: the granting of asylum to US whistleblower Julian Assange. The Wikileaks founder lived in the London Ecuadorian embassy for a year and was granted Ecuadorian citizenship in 2017 which allowed him to avoid arrest by US authorities. His citizenship, however, was recently revoked because of alleged fraud in his naturalization documentation. 

Relations have improved since President Lenín Moreno took office in 2017. President Moreno’s efforts to increase the trade relationship between the two countries and implement more bilateral agreements has elevated Ecuador’s diplomatic relationship with the United States. As a result, USAID’s mission in Ecuador re-opened in 2019.

Key US Foreign Policy considerations

US foreign policy interests in Ecuador reflect larger regional trends. As mentioned in the previous section, drug policies and rule of law are incredibly important to both Ecuador and the United States. 

Another key policy consideration has been US aid to Ecuador for COVID-19 relief. The US Department of State/US Agency for International Development (USAID) has allocated $18 million to Ecuador for COVID assistance. This aid has gone to multiple avenues in Ecuador, not only providing relief to the medical services, but also trying to improve the rule of law, combat corruption, fund infrastructure development projects, provide increased economic opportunities, counter illicit trafficking and defend human rights.

Another key interest to consider is Venezuelan instability and massive rates of emigration. Ecuador is a major destination for Venezuelan migrants. In June 2021, Ecuador announced the implementation of a new “normalization process” for 430,000 Venezuelan migrants living in the country. There is also a rising need for funding coming from outside of Ecuador to support this group. The United States provides funds to support Venezuelan migrants.

REPUBLIC OF PERU

• Capital: Lima
• Population: 33.50 million (2021)
• Government type: Presidential Republic
• GDP per Capita: 6,977 US dollars (2019)
• Official National Language/s: Spanish, Aymara, Quechua
• Majority Religion/s: Roman Catholic (some blend catholicism with indigenous beliefs and practices)
• Global Freedom Score: 71 (partly free)

US History with Peru

The United States established diplomatic relations with the newly independent nation in 1827 and the two countries have maintained a cooperative relationship ever since. 

Like its neighbors, Peru has been a center for coca production and thus a subject of interest for the US’s War on Drugs in the 1980s. Peru was a priority location during this program due to its high rate of production of coca exports. The Peruvian government has largely been supportive of US counter-narcotics efforts in Peru. 

The US has also supported programs in Peru to improve law enforcement and rule of law. Much of the relationship has been characterized by US support for further democratization and human rights promotion. Relations became strained in 2000 with the re-election of President Alberto Fujimori due to concerns of election fraud and corruption in Fujimori’s government. However, following the downfall of Fujimori in November 2000 and the changes in government, relations improved again.

Peru and the US also have an important trade relationship. In 2006 they established the bilateral U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (PTPA) which significantly increased trade between the two countries. Through this agreement the United States also works with Peru to combat wildlife trafficking and transnational crime.

Key US Foreign Policy considerations

Many of the US foreign policy considerations for Peru are similar to those in Ecuador and Bolivia. Similar to Ecuador, COVID-19 assistance has been a current key area of interest. Through June of 2021, Peru had the highest COVID death rate proportion of their population in the world, primarily because their large informal sector was unable to transition to remote work. Early June numbers estimated the official death toll as more than 180,000, a significant number for a population of 33 million. Peru also had a weak healthcare system and lacked sufficient funding for securing the resources required to address the pandemic. As a result, the United States provided $25.8 million in support to Peru to address COVID-19’s impact. The United States has also provided $16 million in humanitarian aid.
Much like the rest of Latin America, Peru has also suffered from corruption and fraud in politics—a key interest in US foreign policy relating to goals of democratization and avoiding authoritarianism abroad. The June Peruvian presidential election saw much controversy regarding fraud and corruption as candidate Fujimori was arrested for fraud and challenged the election of her opponent Castillo. The United States is not directly involved in the investigations of corruption and fraud, but through foreign assistance, policy makers have attempted to improve government transparency and decrease corruption. In the 2019 fiscal year, the United States provided $75 million to Peru for a wide variety of causes, including countering narcotics production and trafficking, eliminating transnational criminal organizations, peacekeeping, implementing effective government and rule of law, and promoting defense cooperation.

The two northernmost countries of the Southern Cone, Uruguay and Paraguay, are linked through both their geographies and their histories. The United States works closely with each country, especially in its efforts to combat drug trafficking across the Americas, and the two are frequent collaborators in establishing and advancing environmental protections.

Republic of Paraguay

Fact Sheet: 

• Population: 7.2 million 
• Capital: Asunción
• System of Governance: Presidential Republic
• Chief of State and Head of Government: President Mario Abdo Benítez
• Majority Languages: Spanish (61.5%) and Guaraní (80.3%)
• Majority Religions: Christianity (Roman Catholic, 89.6%; Protestant, 6.2%)
• GDP Per Capita: $12,685

History of U.S.-Paraguay Relations

The United States recognized Paraguay’s independence from Spain in 1852. In the years following the formation of this relationship, Paraguay experienced a series of coups, civil wars, and dictatorships. During the mid 19th-century, the country was also engaged in a series of border conflicts with its neighbours, in which the US military often attempted to intervene. These tensions culminated in the outbreak of the War of the Triple Alliance (1864-1870), a bloody interstate conflict between Paraguay and the alliance of Argentina, Uruguay, and Brazil, which resulted in the complete destruction of Paraguay and the death of half of its people. Following the devastation of the war, the Paraguayan government transitioned to a republic. However, the country remained divided by inter-party conflict throughout the early 20th century. General Alfredo Stroessner took control of the Paraguayan government by force in 1954, and ruled as dictator for several decades before being overthrown in 1989. During this period, relations between Paraguay and the United States collapsed entirely, a consequence of international backlash against the many human rights abuses committed by the general’s government.

Over the past two decades, Paraguay has slowly made the transition to democracy. The United States encouraged this change and has provided support to the new government. This new relationship has given the United States a new partner in the Southern Cone to cooperate with on international issues of migration, crime, corruption, and environmental conservation.

U.S. Strategic Interests in Paraguay

The United States is one of Paraguay’s largest sources of development aid and foreign direct investment. Of particular interest to the United States are issues of drug trafficking and money laundering, preservation of democratic norms within the country, and the conservation of Paraguay’s many natural resources. 

• Combatting organized crime: The United States considers the presence of organized crime within the Americas to be a matter of national security and, as such, has worked extensively to address drug trafficking and money laundering in Paraguay from multiple angles. First, the US has identified a number of failings in the Paraguayan justice system which have prevented the conviction of those charged with offenses relating to drug trafficking and money laundering. In an effort to address these shortcomings, the US provides financial assistance to public and private institutions working with the justice system and has partnered with Paraguayan law enforcement in its regional counternarcotics operations. 
• Government corruption and preserving democracy: Paraguay’s democracy is unstable due to widespread distrust in the country’s judicial system. Assistance provided to the country through USAID in an attempt to strengthen trust in government and rule of law has included technical assistance to the system’s institutions intended to increase their efficiency, financial and programmatic support granted to institutions of higher education in an effort to better popular legal representation, and aid in the development of public education programs in order to encourage legal literacy among the population. 
• Environmental conservation: The US has and continues to support the government of Paraguay in its efforts to protect its existing natural resources and encourage future sustainable development. Actions taken to advance these ends by the United States include emphasizing the importance of cooperation between state apparatuses on the issue of the environment as part of USAID’s programs to encourage democratic reforms, and continuous evaluations of the environmental impact of USAIDs economic growth initiatives in Paraguay. The US has, in the past, conditioned debt relief and other lending on the grounds that the Paraguayan government uses these additional resources to take action on issues of conservation.

Oriental Republic of Uruguay

Fact Sheet

• Population: 3.4 million
• Capital: Montevideo
• System of Governance: Presidential Republic
• Chief of State and Head of Government: President Luis Alberto Lacalle Pou
• Majority Language: Spanish
• Majority Religions: Christianity (Roman Catholic, 47%), Nondenominational (23.2%), Atheist or Agnostic (17.2%)
• GDP Per Capita: $21,561

History of U.S.-Uruguay Relations

The United States formally established diplomatic relations with Uruguay in 1867. The country was internally fractured by civil war less than a decade after it declared independence in 1830, with followers of Uruguay’s first and second presidents fighting over control of the government and the country’s political future. Conflict between these two factions, the Colorados and the Blancos, eventually boiled over the country’s borders, generating a multinational conflict between the countries of the Southern Cone known as the War of the Triple Alliance. Although the Colorados ended the war in power, tensions between the factions persisted. In 1905, a civilian government backed by popular mandate was established. The early 20th century saw progress on a number of social and political issues, including women’s rights and equitable distribution of power within government. Following the Great Depression, however, the country was once again engulfed in political turmoil leading to conflict and the government’s right-ward, authoritarian shift. Economic instability led to a six decade-long period of alternating constitutional reform and military control. A civilian government returned to power in 1985.

Though the US never formally severed diplomatic ties with the country, relations were strained while Uruguay was under military control. For this reason, the US relationship with Uruguay is weaker than with neighboring countries like Argentina and Brazil. Once Uruguay returned to civilian-led democracy, the two countries began to strengthen their alliance.

U.S. Strategic Interests in Uruguay

A central focus of US-Uruguay relations is the United States’ support for Uruguay’s participation in and support for conflict resolution and peacekeeping efforts in Latin America and across the world. Uruguay has a strong reputation in both regional and international forums for acting as a reliable mediator and for consistently advocating peace, stability, and democracy. In an effort to support these endeavours, the United States provides assistance to the Uruguayan government and military and encourages Uruguay’s engagement in programs, particularly those of the United Nations, that work to these ends. 
As with issues of political stability and peacekeeping, Uruguay takes an active role in international organizations’ efforts to combat international crime. The United States supports these efforts through direct assistance and has partnered with Uruguayan law enforcement agencies and officials to augment the international community’s capacity to undermine organized crime and trafficking organizations, particularly in Central America. The United States similarly provides assistance, in the form of training. to the institutions of the Uruguayan justice system in an effort to support the country’s commitment to reforming and improving the country’s criminal justice and correctional systems.

Fact Sheet

Population: 6,243,931 (July 2021 est.)

Capital: Managua

System of Governance: Presidential Republic

President: Jose Daniel Ortega Saavedra (since 10 January 2007)

Majority Language: Spanish

Majority Religion: Roman Catholic

GDP Per Capita: $5,407 (2019 est.)

Global Freedom Score: 30/100

History of Relationship with the United States

Nicaragua’s relationship with the United States began in 1824, when it declared independence from Spain and subsequently joined the Federation of Central American States. The United States, under the leadership of James D. Monroe, recognized the independence of the Federation of Central American States, which at the time included Guatemala, Honduras, Costa Rica, and El Salvador. It was not until 1849 that the United States recognized the independence of Nicaragua, when then-president James K. Polk held a meeting with the Charge d’Affaires Eduardo Carcache.

The presidency of José Santos Zelaya strained diplomatic relations between the United States and Nicaragua. Several factors contributed to this shift, one of the greatest being Zelaya’s refusal to grant the United States permission to build a canal through the country, forcing them to use Panama instead. Rumors also surfaced that Zelaya was planning to invite Japan to build a canal that would compete with the United States’ waterway in Panama. This motivated the United States to support a conservative opposition revolt. Tensions reached a boiling point when two American citizens were executed for their participation in the revolt. In response, the United States severed diplomatic relations with Nicaragua in 1909. Additionally, United States Marines were sent into Bluefields, a crucial city for Nicaragua’s economy, and the site of revolutionary activity. While guarding American property in Nicaragua, the Marines established a neutral zone in Bluefields. Ultimately, Zelaya sought asylum in Mexico and the United States resumed diplomatic relations with the next president in 1911. Marines remained in Nicaragua until 1932. 

Relations between the two countries remained rocky from 1911 to 1947, though there were few major incidents. In 1947, after former president Anastasio Somoza Garcia overthrew the government of President Leonardo Arguello Brown, the United States once again severed relations with Nicaragua, stating they “would not be disposed to enter into official relations with the regime in power in Nicaragua.” In response to pressure from the United States, elections were held and Victor Roman y Reyes was elected, re-establishing diplomatic relations. 

The Sandinista regime seized power in 1979. Backed by Cuba, the Sandinista regime became a major target of Ronald Reagan’s fight against Communism. Reagan authorized funds in 1982 to assist in the recruiting, training, and armament of Nicaraguan counterrevolutionaries (the Contras) that opposed the Sandinista regime. The Nicaraguan government expelled the American Ambassador in retribution. 

The fall of the Sandinista regime and the beginning of the Chamorro government marked a new era of relations with the United States. The Chamorro government reversed many of the previous regime’s policies and undertook a series of reforms throughout the 1990s. Key policy changes included the reducing the size of the army and the resignation of General Humberto Ortega (chief military officer during the Sandinista regime). These changes signified greater civilian control over the military. However, unrest still defined the administration as disgruntled former Contras (renamed the Recontras) continued to promote unrest because they felt the Sandinista-dominated military was violent towards other political groups, and the administration failed to follow through on its promise of redistributing the land. The Chamorro government managed to disarm most of the Recontras by 1995. When it was time for the election of a new administration in 1996, the Chamorro government promised peaceful elections to transition from one civilian government to another.

Daniel Ortega, the president from 1985-1990, returned to power in 2006 and began Nicaragua’s attempt to transition to a modern economy. This included entering the Central America-Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreement with the United States, which helped the country attract investment, create jobs, and promote economic growth. In 2007, the Inter-American Development Bank cancelled the country’s $1 billion debt. Through the PetroCaribe energy initiative, Venezuela sold crude oil to Nicaragua at discounted prices starting in 2007, allowing the Nicaraguan government to resell the oil at market prices. Profits from this initiative went to social programs to alleviate poverty. The poverty rate fell from 42% to 30% between 2009 and 2014. The US the remained Nicaragua’s largest trading partner, however, the economy began shifting towards China and Russia. In 2014, Nicaragua broke ground on a Chinese-funded canal across, but the project has been suspended due to environmental and financial concerns.

The majority of citizens were content with Ortega due to his social programs that brought many out of poverty. However, some Nicaraguans grew concerned over his increasingly authoritarian rule, lack of government transparency, and control over national courts, military and the police. An incriminating report stated that profits from the PetroCaribe initiative were being diverted to invest in private companies controlled by Ortega’s family and friends. Despite growing uncertainty surrounding the Ortega administration, he was reelected in 2016, and Ortega’s wife was elected vice president.

In April 2018, the government social security program increased worker contributions but decreased benefits, and this served as a catalyst for widespread protests and riots. Anger focused on the Ortega regime, and protests spread across many major cities. These protests were often met with violence. Soon after, Ortega withdrew the social security reform, though the violence towards citizens caused continued protests. The death toll reached nearly 300. By January 2020, nearly 88,000 Nicaraguans had fled the country in response to the unrest. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the United Nations’ human rights spokesmen accused the police and authorities of extrajudicial killings, torture, arbitrary detention, and the denial of the right of freedom and expression.

Following the breakout of COVID in the country, the Ortega administration downplayed the threat of the virus, and continued to permit large-scale gatherings. In addition, new legislation made it illegal to disseminate news that was not government sanctioned and prohibited “traitors” from holding public office without defining the term. The Organization of American States issued a resolution setting May 2021 as the deadline for the Ortega government to impose electoral reforms that favor a more democratic process in attempts to end election irregularities. Despite these measures, in June 2021, Ortega used his newly-passed laws to arrest 26 opposition figures, including six candidates in the running for the upcoming November election. The passing of repressive laws, silencing of civil society, and the undermining of democratic processes and institutions prompted international criticism and condemnation from the Organization of American States. The United States imposed visa restrictions on 100 members of the Nicaraguan assembly and judicial system. 

Relations between the United States and Nicaragua remain rocky. The future of Nicaraguan elections, democratic processes, and civil rights remain in question.

Strategic Interests

Economy

Nicaragua has widespread unemployment and poverty, and is the poorest country in Central America and the second poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. 50% of Nicaragua’s exports are textiles and agricultural products, with a large remainder of exports consisting of beef, gold, and coffee. The United States has remained Nicaragua’s largest trading partner, buying 51% of its exports and supplying Nicaragua with 32% of its imports. The economic strengths of Nicaragua include the low labor cost, the young working class, and tax incentives for possible investors. The weaknesses of Nicaragua’s economy include its high security costs, its reputation as a risky place for investments, growing mistrust in the government and private sector, and lack of trust in governmental institutions.

Counternarcotics and Security Issues

Nicaragua has been grappling with the high risk of human trafficking within its borders. Human trafficking recruiters often use social media outlets within the country to recruit vulnerable populations of women and children. Traffickers within Nicaragua recruit individuals through social media, promising high-paying jobs outside of the country, in reality forcing them into labor. Children are targeted through the same initiatives and are forced into illegal drug trafficking and production. Nicaragua serves as a transshipment point for cocaine and arms-for-drugs shipments into the United States.

Human Rights

24.6% of the country lives below the poverty line, posing a large humanitarian crisis that has received international attention. In 2018, the government expelled the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights’ (IACHR) monitoring mechanisms for the country. The Ortega administration has exacerbated these issues, with civilian deaths sparking international outcries for support.

Migration and Border IssuesAs of April 2020, more than 103,000 Nicaraguans have fled since the violence in April 2018. Costa Rica hosts 77,000 refugees, and thousands of others have fled to Mexico, Panama, Europe, and the United States. Currently, “200,000 Nicaraguans are believed to be in the United States illegally.” The Biden administration, in response to irregular migration flows from the Northern Triangle and Central America, has initiated a “multipronged approach, including Executive Order 14010, which calls for a comprehensive framework to manage migration flows that would ‘facilitate access to protection and other lawful immigration avenues, in both the United States and partner countries, as close to migrants’ homes as possible.’” The Biden administration is requesting “$861 million in foreign assistance for Central America as part of its proposed four-year, $4 billion plan to address the root causes of migration.” The Biden administration continues to focus on the root causes of Central American migration, hoping foreign engagement in the region and funding of social programs will reduce illegal immigration and asylum-seekers at the border from both the Northern Triangle and Mexico.

Source: Map Resources, adapted by Congressional Research Service 

Brazil: A Rising Power

With the fifth largest landmass in the world and the largest population in Latin America (home to roughly one third of the region’s total population), Brazil is a prominent regional power. The country has become a cornerstone of South American growth, which can be attributed to its vast resource-rich territory, which contains most of the Amazon rainforest. With the world’s eighth largest economy, Brazil has been recognized as an emerging world power. Brazil is part of BRICS, the acronym used to designate the world’s most influential emerging economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa). Brazil has also asserted its growing international influence by advocating for better representation of developing nations in international bodies; for example, Brazil has claimed it has a right to a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council. As Brazil’s role in hemispheric and global affairs becomes more prominent, so does the influence the country exerts on international policy issues that affect the United States. 

Fact sheet

• Population: 213,445,417
• Capital: Brasília
• System of Governance: Federal Representative Democratic Republic, under a Presidential System
• President: Jair Messias Bolsonaro
• Majority Language: Portuguese 
• Majority Religion: Roman Catholic (64.6%)
• GDP Per Capita: 6,796.8 
• Global Freedom Score: 74/100
• GINI Index: 53.5

Brief History with the U.S. 

U.S.-Brazil relations are characterized by unsatisfactory efforts to establish a so-called ‘special relationship’ based on the features these countries share: both are young, multi-racial democracies with open economies. For the most part, Brazil has largely avoided this special status and replaced it with cautious distancing. Still, and despite mutual misunderstandings and tensions, the United States enjoys a friendly relationship with Brazil. The U.S. was the first nation to recognize Brazil’s independence from Portugal in 1822. After breaking off from Portugal, Brazilians established a constitutional monarchy and retained its slave-based plantation economy. It was not until 1888 (23 years after the Emancipation Proclamation was issued in the U.S.) that Brazil finally abolished slavery and put an end to its longstanding monarchy by founding a constitutional republic. 

The first decades after independence were characterized by the rule of an authoritarian oligarchy. Coffee plantation owners remained in control of Brazil’s economic and political power. This oligarchical rule came to an end with the rise of the populist Getúlio Vargas from 1930-1945, who devised a unique development model known as Estado Novo, or “New State,” characterized by a combination of union participation and industrialization projects. This model, which endured for much of the 20th century, propelled Brazil to become a South American giant. Brazil sided with the Allied Powers during World War II, ultimately sending 15,000 troops to support the U.S.-led military campaign in Italy. Brazil was the only Latin American country to send military personnel to the battlefield. However, the relationship frayed after the US allocated most of its resources to Europe’s reconstruction under the Marshall Plan, leaving Latin Americans virtually unaided. 

Brazil’s democratic rule came suddenly to an end in 1964, following a military coup that was encouraged and welcomed by the United States. The military government indirectly advanced U.S. interests in the region during the Cold War. For example, the dictatorship actively repressed urban guerrillas and targeted leftist leaders as part of what is known as “Operação Condor,” a secret multi-country counterinsurgency campaign carried out by several military governments in the region and backed by the United States. However, there was no direct coordination between Washington and Brasília; during the Cold War, Brazil sought to pursue an independent foreign policy to distance itself from the United States. This distancing approach became a characteristic element of Brazilian foreign policy for decades to come. The military regime in Brazil was highly repressive, killing more than 8,000 people and at least 434 political dissidents, and detaining and torturing an estimated 30,000-50,000 others. The military rule lasted for more than two decades, until the civilian rule was restored in 1985.

Brazil’s record high inflation during the 1990s triggered political instability and culminated with a set of market-oriented reforms known as “Plan Real“. The government privatized many state-run industries and opened the Brazilian economy to foreign investment. In 2003, center-left President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva expanded welfare programs and, by 2010, poverty rates had fallen from 28.2 to 13.6%. Although President Lula maintained a traditionally distant relationship with the United States, he became an important ally for George W. Bush, which was advantageous in a moment when the anti-American sentiment in the region grew, embodied by figures like Hugo Chávez in Venezuela.

In 2008, as the U.S. economy shrank due to the global Great Recession, the Brazilian economy withstood the economic blow, catapulting the South American nation as a prominent voice in global macroeconomic discussions ever since. The result was an assertive Brazilian foreign policy that often soured relations with the United States during the center-left administrations of Lula da Silva and Dilma Rousseff. For example, Brazil’s decision to support Iran’s nuclear program was resented by Washington. The U.S. has also been hesitant to support Brazil’s membership to the United Nations Security Council. Conversely, Brazil criticized the U.S.’ role in Honduras’ 2009 political crisis, and expressed opposition to Washington’s embargo to Cuba and to the U.S.-Colombia security agreements. 

After Brazil fell into an economic recession in 2014, and a series of corruption scandals led to President Dilma Rousseff’s impeachment, Brazilians elected Jair Bolsonaro. A far-right conservative, he has departed from his predecessors’ traditionally independent foreign policy by deliberately moving Brazil towards alignment with the U.S, especially during the Trump administration. Nevertheless, President Bolsonaro has proven to be a controversial figure. He defended the crimes committed by the dictatorial rule of 1964 and has expressed prejudice towards marginalized communities in Brazilian society. Bolsonaro has also been criticized for his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, after the healthcare system collapsed. The death toll has surpassed half a million, only overtaken by the U.S. and India. Although the Brazilian president was among the few leaders who refused to recognize Biden’s electoral victory, he has expressed interest in cooperating with the new White House. 

U.S. Strategic Interests:

• Trade: Although U.S. trade relations with Brazil have been robust, (mutual trade amounts to $103.9 billion), they have been a major source of controversy. Unlike most Latin American countries, who have heavily relied on U.S. trade, Brazil has turned south and eastward by prioritizing trade through the Southern Common Market, or Mercosur (a free trade agreement between members of the Southern Cone) and the World Trade Organization. In fact, Brazil blocked U.S. efforts to establish a hemispheric-wide free trade agreement in the 1990s and 2000s. In addition, Brazil’s strong trade ties with China have led to animosity between Brasília and Washington. Brazil’s main trading partner is China, not the U.S. The Brazilian economy has benefited from accessing China’s populous market. Chinese presence in Brazil has interfered with U.S. interests in this country. For example, China’s imports of Brazilian soybeans are devastating the Amazon rainforest, threatening U.S. investments in environmental protection. China is also set to install a 5G network in Brazilian territory, a prospect that has raised concerns among the intelligence community in Washington, since intelligence sharing with Brazil might be less secure. Yet, trade with Brazil has given the U.S. a $12.2 billion trade surplus.

• Military and security cooperation: Brazil has coordinated humanitarian assistance efforts alongside the U.S. military. In 2010, the Brazilian government began to work more closely with U.S. intelligence agencies by facilitating and sharing classified information. Intelligence cooperation was further strengthened in 2017 with the implementation of the Master information Exchange Agreement, which allowed both countries to pursue defense-related military technology. The U.S. has also appropriated $666,000 to train the Brazilian military and strengthen coordination efforts between both military forces, as well as selling Brazil military equipment worth $11.2 million dollars. President Bolsonaro aligned Brazilian defense strategy with the U.S., particularly during the Trump administration, which designated Brazil as a major non-NATO ally. The Biden administration has endorsed the designation. 

• Environmental conservation of the Amazon: Because of its tremendous size and biodiversity, the Amazon rainforest plays a crucial role in regulating the globe’s climate. The Amazon Basin absorbs 560 million tons of carbon dioxide per year and holds 76 billion tons of carbon—an amount equivalent to seven years of global carbon emissions. The U.S. government has supported environmental protection of the Amazon since the 1980s. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has implemented comprehensive conservation programs through the establishment of the U.S.-Brazilian Partnership for the Conservation of Amazon Biodiversity (PCAB). The U.S. has also provided technical assistance to Brazilian authorities on fire prevention, and NASA offers close monitoring of the rainforests.

• Narcotics: Although Brazil is not known for being a major drug producer, it is the world’s second largest consumer of cocaine hydrochloride. Recent increases in violence, particularly in the northern region of the country, have been attributed to clashes between criminal organizations that seek to control strategic trafficking routes. In 2008, the U.S. supported counternarcotics capacity-building efforts in Brazil under a U.S.-Brazil Memorandum of Understanding on Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement. A decade later, the U.S. trained nearly 1,000 Brazilian law enforcement agents on counternarcotics and community policing. 

• Human rights concerns: The U.S. Congress has expressed interest in ensuring that the U.S.-trained Brazilian forces strictly comply with human rights standards. In a 2020 report, the U.S. government also expressed concerns about the standing of human rights in Brazil under the Bolsonaro presidency, including extrajudicial killings of Afro-Brazilians at the hands of police, mass incarceration and inhumane imprisonment, extreme violence against journalists, Jews, women, and LGBTQ+ individuals, as well as violence and threats against environmental, indigenous and black activists. The killing of human rights defender Marielli Franco in March of 2018 shocked the country and revealed how hostile Brazil is to activists. A couple of years later, after the killing of George Floyd in the United States, the Black Lives Matter movement became widespread in Brazil, pushing back against police brutality and racism.

• Capital: Caracas
• Population: 28.43 million (2019)
• Government type: Federal Presidential Republic
• President: Disputed between Nicolás Maduro and Juan Guaidó since January 2019
• GDP per Capita: 1,739 US dollars (2020)
• Majority Language/s: Spanish
• Majority Religion/s: Roman Catholic
• Global Freedom Score: 14 (not free)

History of Relationship with the US

Venezuelan relations with the United States began at the same time as Colombia within the united political entity Gran Colombia and, like Colombia, continued after secession from the block. From 1902 to 1903 European powers implemented a naval blockade against Venezuela due to outstanding debts that the government refused to pay back. Despite statements made by President James Monroe that maintained US intolerance for European intervention in Latin America, the United States did not choose to intervene or to aid Venezuela in this crisis. 

In 1948, a military leader by the name of Pérez Jiménez staged a coup and took control of the Venezuelan government. Following the coup, foreign investment grew from US oil companies with support from Jimenez’s administration. Even though the US had a positive diplomatic relationship with this regime, the dictatorship was also responsible for the torture and disappearance of thousands of Venezuelans.

Hugo Chavez’s presidency began in 1999 and he quickly became one of Latin America’s most notable leaders in the early 21st century. His presidency was of foreign policy interest (and concern) to the United States due to his socialist policies that were incompatible with US foreign policy goals in Latin America. His government assumed control of Venezuela’s oil fields from foreign corporations and implemented policies including raising royalties for foreign firms. These actions challenged US economic interests in Venezuela. Much to the US’ dismay, Chavez also formed a public friendship with Cuba, further distancing the US and Venezuela diplomatically. Chavez kept the United States at an arm’s length, even refusing military and economic aid at times. Relations with Chavez worsened following a brief coup in 2002 which allegedly received US support. Despite a tense and distrustful diplomatic relationship between Chavez and the acting US presidents, economic relations continued between the two countries, and the US continually bought Venezuelan oil throughout the 2000s and early 2010s. However, tensions worsened still under the Maduro presidency and since 2014 the United States has imposed strict sanctions against Venezuela, ceasing any oil trade between the two countries.

Key US Foreign Policy Considerations

Venezuela is in political, economic, and humanitarian disarray.  Thus, many US foreign policy concerns address this multidimensional crisis.

In the late 2010s, the acting Maduro government made efforts to consolidate power, ultimately creating a contested political system with both Maduro and Juan Guaidó, leader of the opposition, laying claim to the presidency. The US, concerned with Maduro’s authoritarian leanings and human rights abuses, has supported Juan Guaidó as interim president in an effort to promote the return of free and fair elections in Venezuela. The political crisis in Venezuela has led to generalized violence and humanitarian disaster throughout the country. As a strong opponent to the actions taken by Maduro and his administration, the United States has also implemented a series of unilateral sanctions against those within the administration benefitting from US trade. Most notably, the US has implemented strict sanctions on the state-owned oil company which in the past has made up around 90% of Venezuela’s total revenue. Sanctions have not succeeded in pressuring Maduro’s government to give up control. US sanctions have also garnered widespread criticism due to their illegality per international law. According to Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, sanctions are only to be implemented under UN Security Council decisions. There have also been concerns about the human impacts of these sanctions, which has further exacerbated the economic crisis within the country.

However, the United States has also provided monetary assistance to aid Venezuelans experiencing the devastating effects of the ongoing humanitarian crisis. The humanitarian conditions in Venezuela are characterized by human rights violations (including alleged crimes against humanity perpetrated by Maduro and his supporters), a health crisis (collapse of the healthcare system and shortages in critical supplies), food insecurity, lack of access to fuel and electricity, and high rates of crime and insecurity. The United States government has allocated more than $1 billion dollars of aid to help Venezuelans both within the country and those living elsewhere as migrants. The US has provided monetary aid in order to fund programs geared toward improving quality of life for Venezuelans. Such programs involve improvements in access to basic necessities, such as food, water, and healthcare.

As a result of the ongoing generalized violence and humanitarian crisis, Venezuela has been experiencing a mass exodus of its population as millions of Venezuelans flee to neighboring countries. Colombia and Brazil have been major destinations for many Venezuelans, due to their proximity as well as relatively open immigration policies, which also recognize most Venezuelans as refugees. The US has also seen an increase of Venezuelan migrants, which has also garnered controversy and criticism in terms of policies or lack thereof to provide refuge to Venezuelans who cannot return to their homes. President Trump refused to implement any sort of special protective status for migrants from Venezuela for the majority of his presidency, only implementing a Deferred Enforced Departure program for Venezuelans January 20th, 2021, the final day of his presidential term. The protections under DED were expanded by President Biden with the creation of Temporary Protected Status for Venezuelans already residing in the United States. This status, a measure taken in response to the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Venezuela, further protects Venezuelans residing in the US from deportation and permits them to get employment authorization in the United States. Unfortunately, this status does not apply to Venezuelan asylum seekers who still experience immense difficulties in immigrating to the US.

Mexico shares 3,155 kilometers of border with the United States and serves as one of the United States’ most important trading partners. The two countries have shared strategic interests relating to the economy, migration, counternarcotics, and anti-crime policies. Although their relationship has been rocky, it has proven to be crucial to the functioning of both countries. 

Fact Sheet

Population: 130,207,371 (July 2021 est.)

Capital: Mexico City (Ciudad de México)

System of Governance: Federal Presidential Republic

President: Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador

Majority Language: Spanish

Majority Religion: Roman Catholic

GDP Per Capita: $19,796

Global Freedom Score: 61/100

Early History

Expansionist advocate James K. Polk was elected US President in 1848, setting the stage for the Mexican-American War. The Mexican-American War is often referred to as the “original sin of their relationship.” It ended with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo which allotted more than half of Mexico to the United States, including Texas and parts of modern day California, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, and Wyoming. 

The 1910 Mexican Revolution was the next challenge in the relationship. The United States was concerned that the revolution would inspire uprisings in the large Mexican population within its borders, and President Wilson placed an embargo on the country and sent the Marine Corps into a crucial port city.

President Roosevelt, initiated the Good Neighbor Policy between the two nations in his 1933 address, which stated “the definitive policy of the United States from now on is one opposed to armed intervention.” Roosevelt aimed to rekindle economic ties between the United States and Mexico. 

World War II and the Rest of the 20th Century

The newfound goodwill between the two nations carried over into international conflicts. Mexico supported the United States in World War II by sending troops to fight the Axis Powers and providing the United States’ economy with strategic metals, oil, rubber, food, and agricultural material for the war effort. After World War II, Mexico went through a stage of large economic growth and development known as the ”Mexican Miracle”. By 1950, foreign investment in Mexico was up to half a billion dollars, with much of it coming from the United States. 

The “Mexican Miracle” came to a sharp halt in the 1980s due to both political instability and concentration of wealth to the upper class. In 1994, the United States, Mexico, and Canada signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which created a free trade zone for the three countries. This encouraged investment and increased market access. 

21st Century

Organized crime and drug trafficking across the US-Mexico border increased in the early 2000s. To combat this, the United States signed the Merida Initiative in October 2007 which provided rule-of-law and anti-drug assistance to government entities. Relations were strained by some of President Trump’s foreign policy decisions, like the Remain in Mexico Program and withdrawal from NAFTA. The Remain in Mexico Program, initiated in December 2018, required certain asylum-seekers arriving by land to the U.S.-Mexico border to return to Mexico for the duration of their trial in the U.S. Immigration Court. This policy was heavily criticized by both governments, as it returned many asylum-seekers back to unsafe conditions with little to no social, family, or legal support. NAFTA was replaced by a new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement that did little to alter the trade dynamic between the three countries; however, it initiated sunset clauses on the deal and increased the automotive workforce and the United States’ dairy exports. 

The Biden Administration has aimed to restore closer ties with Mexico in fighting crime, drug trafficking, and tackling issues of migration, climate, and trade. Almost immediately after taking office, Biden ended Trump’s Stay In Mexico Policy. The two presidents met virtually to combat the COVID-19 and climate change, and increase economic cooperation

U.S. Strategic Interests

Economic interests: The United States serves as Mexico’s number one trade partner, and Mexico is the United States’ third largest trade partner. Top exports from Mexico to the United states include automobiles and auto parts, computer equipment, and other manufactured goods. The economy of Mexico is heavily reliant on exports to the United States, as roughly 85% of Mexico’s imports in 2019 were United States-bound. The Biden Administration ushered in a new era of economic policy centered on investments to curb carbon emissions and address climate change. In their joint statement, Biden and Obrador highlighted the need to cooperate on climate issues. Little progress has been made on this front, despite pressure from environmental advocacy groups. 

Migration: Mexico remains the largest country of origin of migrants in the United States, driven by high immigration in the 90s and early 2000s. Asylum requests at the U.S.-Mexican border have “doubled each year since 2015, reaching 70,300 in 2019” however asylum seekers are primarily from other Central American countries who transit through Mexico. Under the Trump Administration, immigration policies were characterized by America First Policies, prioritizing security at the border and decreasing immigration numbers through initiatives such as the “Zero-Tolerance Policy” and the Stay In Mexico Policy. Protecting the rights of Mexicans residing within the United States, including undocumented individuals, continues to be one of the top priorities of the Mexican government. Many Mexican border cities have been sheltering tens of thousands of migrants since 2019. The Biden Administration reversed many of these policies, but the future of many Mexican immigrants in the United States remains in question.
Drug Trafficking: Mexican drug trafficking organizations are “the greatest criminal threat” to the United States. Drug-trafficking groups import and distribute cocaine, fentanyl, heroin, marijuana, and methamphetamine in the United States. The 2007 Merida Initiative provides aid to the Mexican government to combat organized crime and drug trafficking. Since the implementation of the Merida Initiative, the United States has allocated nearly $3 billion in security and counternarcotics assistance. Despite the implementation of numerous initiatives to fight crime and drug-trafficking, the Merida Initiative has thus far proven to be ineffective in improving security in Mexico because it escalated violence and did not address systemic corruption.

Fact sheet

• Population: 9,346,277 (July 2021 est.)
• Capital: Tegucigalpa 
• System of Governance: Presidential Republic
• President: Juan Orlando Hernández
• Majority Language: Spanish
• Majority Religion: Roman Catholic
• GDP Per Capita: $2,574.912
• Global Freedom Score: 44

Brief History with the U.S.

The U.S. established diplomatic relations with Honduras as early as 1853; however, it was not until the 1980s that Honduras became a critical ally for U.S. policy in Central America. Honduras was encircled by two countries swept by civil wars. Nicaragua, Honduras’ southern neighbor, entered into a violent revolution between the revolutionary Sandinistas and the dictator Antonio Somoza. Similarly, in the southwest, El Salvador experienced clashes between the revolutionary Martí Front for National Liberation, also known as Frente Martí para la Liberación Nacional in Spanish (FMLN), and the U.S.-backed government. As Roberto Suazo Córdova, an outspoken anticommunist, assumed the Honduran presidency, the country became a strategic ally for U.S. policy in Central America. It was in Honduras’ territory where the U.S. trained “the Contra” forces (guerilla fighters), who attempted to oust the left-wing Sandinista government, as well as Salvadoran forces in their effort to dissolve the FMLN insurgency. In 1983, the U.S. military unit known as the Joint Task Force Bravo settled in Honduras, which played a critical role for U.S. counterinsurgency activity during the Cold War. Eventually, this model of military coordination was interrupted in the late 1980s, when Costa Rica mediated peace talks that aimed to quell the armed conflict in Central America by restricting Contra activity and reducing U.S. presence in Honduras. 

Historically, migration has been a defining feature of the United States’ relationship with Honduras. The migratory flows from Honduras that the United States has witnessed recently can be traced back to 1998, when Hurricane Mitch, one of the worst storms to ever strike the Western Hemisphere, resulted in more than 11,000 deaths and displaced 1.1 million people in Central America, with Honduras at the forefront of the devastation. The U.S. government responded in the aftermath of Hurricane Mitch by increasing development aid and establishing the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Hondurans. Today more than 79,000 Hondurans are TSP holders. The widespread poverty and devastation occasioned by Hurricane Mitch and staggering levels of gang violence have pushed Hondurans to migrate to the U.S.. In 1996, after a change in immigration law, the U.S. exported street gangs to Central America causing gang violence in Honduras to increase. From 1995 to 2010, crime rates nearly tripled. In 2012, Honduras broke records and led the world with the highest crime rate. In that year, 90 people were murdered for every 100,000 inhabitants. 

Since the onset of the twenty-first century, the U.S. has pursued ambitious efforts to promote stability in Honduras, hoping to prevent migration. Honduras was one of the first countries to join the Millennium Challenge Corporation, which provided the government with $215 million in aid to support economic development. A year later, Honduras entered the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR). Both of these initiatives were designed and funded by the U.S. government as part of a strategy to address migration by promoting economic development and stability. 

U.S. relations with Honduras were strained during the country’s severe political crisis in 2009. The two parties backed a military coup, in which former President Manuel Zelaya was forcibly sent into exile in Costa Rica after he attempted to revise the constitution to allow him to run for a second term. The United Nations and the Organization of American States (OAS)  were quick to denounce the military coup and demanded the return of Zelaya to power; however, the U.S. State Department opted for calling for new elections and refrained from using the word “coup,” ultimately weakening trust in the bilateral relationship. Since 2014, President Juan Orlando Hernández has been leading the country. In 2017, the U.S. government controversially sided with Hernández once again and backed his re-election, despite the opposition from the OAS electoral observers and some members of the U.S. Congress, who declared the election to be fraudulent. In exchange, Honduras has remained on board with contentious U.S. foreign policy positions, such as the transfer of the U.S. Embassy to East Jerusalem. The steady support the U.S. government continues to provide to the Hernández presidency, despite the disputed election, as well as credible accusations of corruption and drug trafficking, has undermined the credibility of the U.S.-backed initiatives in Honduras.

More recently, the Hernández administration has been challenged by slow economic growth, high rates of crime, and rising migration. Recent U.S. efforts to reduce migration, tackle local crime, and promote development in Honduras include CARSI (The Central America Regional Security Initiative), the Strategy for Central America Engagement, and the Alliance for Prosperity. More recently, the U.S. Agency for International Development has invested $8.9 million dollars in assistance to respond to health, educational, and economic effects of the pandemic. There is disagreement over how successful U.S. aid has been, and U.S. development agencies have been accused of failing to provide “meaningful metrics to measure progress.” 

Strategic Interests:

• Trade: The total amount of trade between the two countries amounted to $10.3 billion dollars. The U.S. is Honduras’ main trading partner and has run a trade surplus with Honduras since 2007.
• Anti-corruption and governance: The National Anti-Corruption Council, a recipient of aid from USAID, estimates that corruption during the Hernández administration has cost Honduras $10.5 billion—nearly the government’s annual budget. President Hernández cooperated with the U.S. and the Organization of American States (OAS) in the creation of the Support Mission Against Corruption and Impunity in Honduras or MACCIH, as it is known from its initials in Spanish. This anti-impunity commission was modeled after Guatemala’s CICIG but with a much weaker structure. Still, the MACCIH managed to bring charges against 360 politicians, including President Hernández. Threatened with conviction, many members of the Honduran Congress passed a law that blocked anti-impunity efforts, which effectively overturned the charges in October of 2019. In 2020, President Hernández decided not to renew the MACCIH’s mandate, bringing about the commission’s collapse in January 2020. 
• Drug-trafficking: Honduras is a major transit country for illicit drugs. In 2016, roughly 53% of South American cocaine bound for the U.S. was shipped through Honduras. Honduras has willingly cooperated with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in the establishment of anti-narcotic units and has supported aerial interdictions conducted by the U.S. Additionally, since Honduras signed an extradition agreement with the U.S., the Department of Justice has brought at least 25 Honduran narco-traffickers to justice, including President Hernández’s brother, who was accused of “state-sponsored drug trafficking” for allegedly working with Mexican, Colombian, and Honduran cartels. 
• Military cooperation: Today, the Joint Task Force Bravo in Honduras remains crucial for U.S. intelligence operations in Central America. It is comprised of 500 U.S. military officers and more than 500 American and Honduran civilians. Current operations focus primarily on disrupting drug trafficking, preventing gang violence, providing disaster relief and humanitarian assistance, and monitoring military operations throughout Latin America and the Caribbean.
• Security: USAID has designed local programs that focus on crime prevention. According to recent assessments, communities where USAID implemented these programs reported 43% fewer murders.  
• Migration management: In 2018, a caravan of Honduran migrants caught the world’s attention. It became a symbol for the massive migration waves that would follow. In 2019, for example, apprehensions of Hondurans along the U.S. border reached a record high, representing 3 percent of Honduras’ population. The U.S. government has made the reduction of migration from Honduras one of its top priorities, particularly during the Trump Administration, which suspended development aid and demanded that Honduras deter its citizens from traveling to the U.S.. Hernández’s government signed a “Safe Third Country Agreement,” which the Biden administration rescinded. President Biden has resumed disbursing development aid but has upheld the deterrence approach in Honduras. 
• Human Rights: The U.S. government has emphasized human rights promotion in Honduras since the 1980s, though some analysts argue that this goal has been subordinated to U.S. military interests. More recently, the U.S. has allocated an average of $6 million per year to the defense of human rights in Honduras, emphasizing the protection of human rights defenders, environmental activists, and members of the LGBTQ+ community.