The people of El Salvador will head to the polls on Sunday for the country’s presidential election, and debate has swirled over whether the country will make a left turn and elect Mauricio Funes of the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN). The ruling conservative Arena party has governed the country for two decades.
Sebastián Chaskel is a research associate for Latin America Studies at a foreign policy think tank in New York City, and is originally from Bogotá, Colombia. He writes at “Latin American Thought” about U.S. influence on the election.
El Salvador and U.S. dependence
It has become a cliché to say that Latin America is no longer the United States’ backyard. An Inter-American Dialogue report that came out yesterday mentions “[t]he growing assertiveness and independence of Latin America and the Caribbean,” as well as the “declining ability of the United States to exert authority and shape outcomes in the region.” A Brookings Institution report a few months ago discussed the “enhanced confidence and autonomy” of the region’s countries, and a CFR report flatly called the Monroe doctrine obsolete. Even President Obama as a candidate echoed these sentiments. “The situation has changed in the Americas, but we’ve failed to change with it. Instead of engaging the people of the region, we’ve acted as if we can still dictate terms unilaterally,” he said in Miami last May. But a look at El Salvador this month would have you thinking otherwise.
As the country approaches presidential elections this weekend, the United States has been front and center in both mayor candidates’ campaigns. Mauricio Funes, running for the left-wing FMLN released ads in December that directly compare him to U.S. President Obama. One of them congratulates President Obama on his victory and states that Funes looks forward to working with him on immigration reform. He even uses Obama’s slogans, in Spanish and English.
U.S.-El Salvador relations trump bread and butter issues in El Salvador because bread and butter depend on this bilateral relationship. The number of Salvadorans abroad (2.5 million) is comparable to El Salvador’s work force (2.8 million). Remittances, which account for about 18% of the country’s GDP, have been El Salvador’s most important foreign exchange earner for years. They drive consumption, which in turn drives economic growth, accounting for 96% of it in 2008.
This helps explain why for the past four years El Salvador had been the only Latin American country to maintain troops in Iraq. In exchange for the contribution the U.S. government extended Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to El Salvador, which allows about 230,000 Salvadoran immigrants to remain legally in the United States. When President Saca agreed to keep 200 Salvadoran troops in Iraq in August 2008 he was thanked by an 18-month extension of the TPS program.
But a country the size of Massachusetts, El Salvador’s dependence on the U.S. does not end with remittances. In 2001 the country adopted the U.S. dollar as legal tender and the United States is El Salvador’s number one trading partner, accounting for 50% of its exports and 35% of its imports.
In a country where virtually everyone has family members in the U.S. and where rice and beans are paid with bills featuring George Washington, people understand that their prosperity depends on one special relationship, and they have reasons to suspect the U.S. cares about who they elect.
To read more, see the original post.
The views expressed by contributing bloggers do not reflect the views of Worldfocus or its partners.