Logo de Confidencial Digital

PUBLICIDAD 1M

PUBLICIDAD 4D

PUBLICIDAD 5D

Trump vs. Harris on Central America: A Choice Between Immigrant Expulsion or Exclusion

“Review of the CAFTA free trade agreement is definitely on the Democratic and Republican agenda,” says researcher Manuel Orozco

U.S. presidential candidates former President Donald Trump and current Vice President Kamala Harris.

U.S. presidential candidates former President Donald Trump and current Vice President Kamala Harris // Photo: EFE/ Ting Shen / Pool

Carlos F. Chamorro

29 de octubre 2024

AA
Share

What difference would a Republican Donald Trump or Democrat Kamala Harris presidency make for Central America? Political scientist Manuel Orozco, director of the Migration, Remittances and Development program of the Inter-American Dialogue, sums it up as a matter of emphasis in the approach to immigration: “For Trump it's about expelling immigrants, for Harris it's about excluding immigrants; that is, not letting more people in.”

In an interview with the program Esta Semana, broadcast on YouTube because of television censorship in Nicaragua, Orozco analyzed the differences between the two candidates: if Donald Trump wins the presidency, “Central Americans who benefit from TPS [Temporary Protective Status] would no longer receive it.” If Kamala Harris wins, “the issue of humanitarian parole is going to be critical. It is unlikely to continue next year, and there will be restrictions on political asylum.”

Orozco also said that both Democrats and Republicans are inclined to exert “more pressure” on the dictatorship of Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, and that a review of the DR-CAFTA [Free Trade] treaty, signed more than two decades ago, is on the agenda of both parties.

The United States presidential contest between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump is practically tied in the states where this election will be decided. Central America has been indirectly present in the electoral debate due to the weight of the immigration issue. What are the differences between Donald Trump's and Kamala Harris' proposals on immigration, and what does it mean for Central America?


The differences are where they put the emphasis. Both are looking to restrict immigration. For Trump it's about expulsion, for Harris it's about exclusion; that is, not letting more people in. So what are we going to see? In the case of Harris, greater border protection, greater immigration restrictions, making the asylum application process more difficult by imposing more restrictions on the criteria.

On the other side, a President Trump will try to increase the expulsion of people using massive deportations. If they used to deport 300,000, their goal is at least 500,000 a year. In addition to that, [he will try to] eliminate a whole series of policies that have existed. For example, citizenship for minors who are children of immigrants without nationality in the United States, is one of the measures they are proposing to eliminate, as well as humanitarian parole, and imposing protection protocols, among other things.

So there is exclusion and expulsion from both sides. One more drastic than the other. The implications for Central America are that Central Americans who benefit from TPS would no longer receive it in the case of Trump. In the case of Kamala Harris the [humanitarian] parole issue is going to be critical. It is unlikely to continue next year, with more restrictions on political asylum. Those who arrived with parole and don't have a good justification will have a difficult time.

Beyond the immigration issue, there has been little or no reference in the electoral debate to Latin America, to Central America. With regards to the specific case of Daniel Ortega's dictatorship in Nicaragua, what could be expected from a new Democratic administration or a second presidency of Donald Trump?

It all depends on who is in charge. In the case of a possible Trump administration, there are two or three Republicans who have been very involved with Donald Trump's campaign who are Latinos, politically conservative, very proactive. One of them could really have a very critical position and exert pressure on Nicaragua. How far the scope of that pressure goes, it all really depends on the level of authority they have and whatever conflicts that arise in other contexts.

Who are you talking about? People who can hold positions such as Secretary of State? Or someone on the Security Council, or in the White House?

No. Basically, an Under Secretary of State for Latin America would be in a key position to put more pressure on Nicaragua, more than in the National Security Council. In the OAS they would not have such a role, but they would in the case of an under secretary for Latin America.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE DISPATCH

Get the most prominent news about Nicaragua, every Wednesday, directly to your inbox.

In the case of a Harris administration, the team that makes up the Latino pro-Harris campaign includes a group that is now part of the Biden administration as well as a new group. Both have a position on Nicaragua to tighten the screws a little more. The tricky knot right now in the relationship with Nicaragua has to do with Ukraine, and the next year is going to be crucial in terms of how foreign aid support to Ukraine is handled, which may resolve some elements of a more proactive policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean.

What Harris would be doing is expanding her agenda on the causes of immigration, which is basically her platform, and that could include Nicaragua.

Would the issue of reviewing CAFTA, or Nicaragua's participation in this trade agreement that grants it a series of advantages for exporting to the United States, be on the agenda of Republicans and Democrats in a future administration?

It's on both parties' and campaign teams' agendas. The only one that's resisting it is the Foreign Trade Commission. They are the ones who want to avoid renegotiating the free trade agreement, because from their perspective that would open up the whole problem of how to redefine a series of tariffs, trade relations, and products that have already been established.

However, there is recognition from all sides that CAFTA, after more than 20 years, needs to be updated, and in that process, clauses on democratic compliance would be included.

How many Nicaraguans residing in the United States will vote in this election, or are eligible to vote, and what is their political leaning?

The number of Nicaraguans who are eligible to vote is small, maybe less than 200,000, around about 150,000. Prior to 2018 there were fewer than 400,000 Nicaraguans in the United States. Of those, two-thirds had some kind of regularized legal status, but only 120,000 had citizenship. At this point there may be 150,000 voters who are distributed primarily in the large states, and who have already defined how they will vote.

You're talking about Florida, California, Texas and New York, where there are long-standing Nicaraguan communities, and where political trends are already defined. Are there Nicaraguan communities in the swing states, where Latinos can decide this election?

There are some in Michigan, in Pennsylvania. There are very few Nicaraguans, maybe several thousand. They generally end up voting Democrat rather than Republican. The trend right now, though, is 50-50 within the Nicaraguan American electorate.

This article was published in Spanish in Confidencial and translated by our staff. To get the most relevant news from our English coverage delivered straight to your inbox, subscribe to The Dispatch.

PUBLICIDAD 3M


Your contribution allows us to report from exile.

The dictatorship forced us to leave Nicaragua and intends to censor us. Your financial contribution guarantees our coverage on a free, open website, without paywalls.



Carlos F. Chamorro

Carlos F. Chamorro

Periodista nicaragüense, exiliado en Costa Rica. Fundador y director de Confidencial y Esta Semana. Miembro del Consejo Rector de la Fundación Gabo. Ha sido Knight Fellow en la Universidad de Stanford (1997-1998) y profesor visitante en la Maestría de Periodismo de la Universidad de Berkeley, California (1998-1999). En mayo 2009, obtuvo el Premio a la Libertad de Expresión en Iberoamérica, de Casa América Cataluña (España). En octubre de 2010 recibió el Premio Maria Moors Cabot de la Escuela de Periodismo de la Universidad de Columbia en Nueva York. En 2021 obtuvo el Premio Ortega y Gasset por su trayectoria periodística.

PUBLICIDAD 3D