El Salvador's Latest Gang Crackdown Includes Human Rights Violations
President Nayib Bukele is using brutal tools to solve a problem driven partly by U.S. immigration policy.

Amid a wide-reaching government crackdown on organized criminal groups in the country, almost 2 percent of El Salvador's adult population has been detained and at least 18 people have died in police custody, according to a new report from the human rights group Amnesty International.
The crackdown was initiated by President Nayib Bukele in March. It is aimed at suspected members of MS-13, also known as Mara Salvatrucha, and Barrio 18, both of which are street gangs that emerged in El Salvador following waves of mass deportations of Salvadoran immigrants from the United States in the 1980s and 1990s.
In addition to reports of arbitrary detentions, torture, and inhumane conditions in now-overcrowded prisons, the government has also reportedly targeted journalists, activists and even judicial officials, amounting to what Amnesty International is describing as "massive human rights violations." According to Amnesty International's report, El Salvador's government has made arrests without "administrative or judicial arrest warrant[s]" and without catching defendants in the act of committing a crime; rather, arrests are based on a defendant's prior criminal record or because they live in a community with a large gang population. Many arrestees have been denied access to legal representation and are held for weeks before seeing a judge.
The U.S. government, which has long played a role in El Salvador's organized crime problem, has remained relatively silent. Barring one statement from Secretary of State Antony Blinken on April 10, and one answer by Blinken to a question at a press conference in Panama City on April 20, U.S. diplomatic institutions have largely responded with silence toward these reports. In neither statement did Blinken acknowledge how these gangs came to hold such sway in El Salvador, instead restating previous U.S. support of the Salvadoran government. "We continue to support El Salvador in its efforts to reduce the proliferation of gangs. Since 2008, we have invested $411 million to improve citizen security and help the Salvadoran government combat gang violence," Blinken said in his April 10 statement.
"It's ironic, because you could argue that 20 to 30 years later, the U.S. is now reaping the results of very mistaken policy from the 1980s," says Harry Vanden, professor emeritus of political science and international studies at the University of South Florida and a leading expert on Central American gang violence. In Vanden's view, a combination of heavy-handed U.S. interventions in support of El Salvador's right-wing military junta during the 1980s and U.S. deportations of Salvadorans to an economically impoverished country just out of the throes of civil war set the stage for street gangs to explode in power, reach and influence. "[The street gangs] incorporated the violence and they have continued to build on it."
In addition to waging paramilitary violence, gangs like MS-13 and Barrio 18 became a refuge for many deported Salvadorans, especially those who returned to the country after living for years in the United States. A 2017 World Bank study noted that 81 percent of deportees were men, and that many Salvadorans repatriated from the United States "return home poorer and with fewer resources to start over," having drained their resources and social networks in order to make the initial journey north. They also face new stigmas associated with their deportations. Gangs provide support and act as substitute families. For these reasons, "solutions to this problem need to address social exclusion and lack of opportunity as much or more as they do the law enforcement challenges posed by the gang," reads a report commissioned by the Department of Justice under former President Donald Trump.
El Salvador remains one of the world's most dangerous countries, and taking on the gangs has remained a priority for Salvadoran governments since the end of the civil war. Previous governments have balanced mano dura, or heavy policing, with secret negotiations with gang leaders, at times reportedly bribing gangs in exchange for reduced homicides. As Salvadoran news outlet El Faro has reported, Bukele's government was acting no differently before March 2022, trying to negotiate a similar truce to the one El Salvador's government reached with the gangs in the early 2010s. However, negotiations broke down after the government arrested a group of MS-13 members who had been granted safe passage while they rode in a government-provided vehicle driven by a government-contracted driver. This perceived betrayal prompted an unprecedented explosion in homicides in which 87 people were killed by gang members in three days. Hence, the latest crackdown.
Some believe that the U.S. should use its soft power to hold the Salvadoran government accountable. "Rhetoric from the U.S. government that seeks to enforce the importance of Salvadoran civil society and independent media should be accompanied by clear action that supports these groups," Ana María Méndez Dardón, a human rights lawyer and the Central America director at the Washington Office for Latin America, wrote in a recent analysis. However, others are skeptical that the U.S. can intervene effectively from a diplomatic or political perspective. "The idea that the U.S. can go in and remedy these problems is a false assumption that is a great deal of the problem," Vanden says, pointing to negative perceptions of the U.S. in the region following decades of military interventions.
Foreign aid to El Salvador has also been fraught. A recent report by the Wilson Center sharply criticized U.S. assistance programs in the Northern Triangle region, which includes Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras, noting lack of coordination between aid providers and discrepancies between the design of aid programs and the on-the-ground realities. Throwing more money at the gang violence crisis in El Salvador will likely yield even fewer dividends.
However, immigration reform provides a clear pathway for indirect intervention. Experts believe that the U.S. should negotiate bilateral labor agreements with El Salvador, similar to the ones Canada has with other Northern Triangle countries, as a long-term way to harness the benefits of migrants and create mutually-shared benefits for both countries. In the short term, they see improving access to H-2 visa programs as a key first step, to ensure that workers and employers alike can take advantage of the system and ultimately illegal migration can be reduced.
"For a migrant deciding between the two, greater accessibility to H-2 visa programs would appear competitive compared to an unlawful pathway," argued the Center for Global Development in a 2020 policy brief. That change in incentives would not only stymie the growth of gang cells in the United States, but would also improve the economic well-being of both the U.S. and El Salvador.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Asking a really serious question here, regarding this quote:
Has anyone compared the "massive human rights violations" of the gangs and the government? Which one is worse?
It's a real question. All governments, even dictatorships and authoritarian hellholes, are ultimately responsible to The People. The People put up with all sorts of shit mostly from inertia, but partly because the alternative is worse. When crime runs rampant, even if it is with government complicity, people will put up with an evil government which can reduce crime, or at least be perceived as doing so.
I am asking seriously: how bad was gang crime before? Was it worse than what the government is doing now? Which regime is more predictable, which is easier to predict and stay out of trouble with?
Me, personally, if the deaths and taxation are the same either way and equally out of my control, I'd take government any day, since they are more predictable than random criminals. Someone really ought to do a study.
Such as which is more dangerous to my wallet, the Burn Loot Murder riots, or government property assessors and cops?
Populism doesn't rise up on its own. Like all crops, it must be seeded from something, and weeds are all in the eye of the beholder.
"if the deaths and taxation are the same either way and equally out of my control, I'd take government any day, since they are more predictable than random criminals."
In this specific case, I don't know the answer to your question, but regarding your point pasted above, I'd say there is little difference between a weak (especially if corrupt) government and a powerful gang. Both are on the continuum of a minority of the powerful imposing their will on the rest by force. When a gang gets powerful enough to claim legitimacy, they become the government.
Which one is better for you? It depends on who you know.
Ignoring the "who you know" variable, government thuggery is more predictable; you can keep your head down, don't try to be part of it, mind your own business, and are much less likely to be mugged by some random criminal.
Yeah, that seems correct, but I'd rather be living under MS-13 in El Salvador than Kim Jong-un in N. Korea (to go to the most extreme example).
Certainly. Their evils are not even close.
However when you pay a gang protection money, you will not be robbed by anyone else.
When you pay the gov their protection money, you will be robbed, then the gov will arrest you for not being able to afford the taxes
This is an interesting question. I have a friend, in his 70s now, who grew up in a mafia-controlled community. There was little or no vandalism or street crime. Women and children could walk safely. Businesses were hit up for "protection", but most residents were kept safe by simply knowing who to respect.
On the other hand, there was no "due process". Once a car was abandoned at the end of his street. After a couple of days, the police popped the trunk and found the body of someone who had shown disrespect to the wrong person.
Looking back, my friend doesn't approve of organized crime but he says that it wasn't a bad childhood. There were risks, but it was stable and predictable.
He's just one story. I wonder how one would do actual research on this.
how TF is their crime problem the US's fault? That's a really stupid stretch
The logic seems to be that a bunch of El Salvadorans came to the U.S., committed crimes, went to jail and joined gangs, then were deported back home.
The implied argument seems to be that America should have kept the violent gang members, so El Salvador didn't have to deal with them.
You know what? I'm cool with sending violent immigrants back to their country of origin.
It’s mental gymnastics to justify further opening US borders to more Central Americans.
MS-13 started in the US prison system. When it got out of hand, Clinton deported a powerful criminal organization to a country that had never seen criminals like that. The country essentially was conquered by the gang.
President Nayib Bukele is using brutal tools to solve a problem driven partly by U.S. immigration policy.
El Oh El. List of countries in the proximity to El Salvador that El Salvadorian emigres could leave to, or must pass through before going to the US:
Guatemala
Belize
Mexico
Honduras
Nicaragua
Costa Rica (I hear it's nice and super progressive, man)
Panama
Cuba (just a short boat ride away from Cancun!)
Yep. This is just more open borders bullshit.
2 percent of El Salvadoran population has been detained
On the bright side, the US no longer leads the world in detaining its population
I believe after COVID, that distinction went to Australia and Canada.
Only if you exclude China, Cuba, and North korea
President Nayib Bukele is using brutal tools to solve the problem of extreme criminal gang violence
Good luck to him. May he exterminate the lot of them.
The only good MS-13 is a dead MS-13.
"how can we get our hands on all the bitcoin coming from America?"
My "OH SHIT" meter bottoms out internationally. Reason seems OK with our northern neighbors turn to outright fascism. Do not know why I should give two shits what a country NOT on our border is doing.
Canadians can't be imported to work for super cheap because they don't have anything to look forward to back home. Canada is a rich country and Canadians are happy to return to Canada if there's no good job here. No leverage there.
Some Central American state that's struggling with internal security is a terrible place to go back to. So import immigrants from there and they'll never ask for a raise or do anything to risk getting deported, which makes for a much cheaper labor force.
Sorry, Shika, I still don't believe you.
Are they holding suspected gang members in solitary confinement for a year without charging them?
The best assistance the US could provide to the cause of international human rights is drone strikes against everyone affiliated with Amnesty International.
In Vanden's view, a combination of heavy-handed U.S. interventions in support of El Salvador's right-wing military junta during the 1980s and U.S. deportations of Salvadorans to an economically impoverished country just out of the throes of civil war set the stage for street gangs to explode in power, reach and influence.
I don't know international stuff well. So, I will attempt to be conservative in what I say. I'm open to the first part there being an argument. The second one, about deporting Salvadorans back to their own country being our fault, is less convincing. I legitimately don't understand what the argued alternative would be there except the US literally locking up criminal foreign nationals so that their own country of origin doesn't have to deal with them.
Pretty sure they think the gang members should have just released in the US.
Couldn't be the lack of individual/private property rights in El Salvador, could it?
This is a tendentious hit piece in all regards… wow…
Governments, i.e., big gangs of thugs, love, need, little gangs of thugs. They can use them as proof that govt. provides protection, and the initiation of violence is needed, no matter how obnoxious.
Since I am a voluntarist, I reject both gangs, being consistently opposed to anyone who initiates violence.
Before gangs/organized crime the boogymen were tycoons, moonshiners, smugglers (people who dealt in untaxed goods).