On the Rule of Law in Guatemala
Leaving aside the question of whether economic growth precedes or follows the quality-upgrade of institutions, every country wants economic growth. So, who could be against the rule of law?
US policies on immigration and its relations in general with key Central American nations are in deep disarray. The US has “lost” El Salvador, Honduras has elected a socialist government with strong inclinations towards communist China, and its own policies are driving away its last, most loyal partner in the region, Guatemala. According to the US State Department (DOS), Guatemala is backsliding on its commitment to democracy and anti-corruption.
It is the stated DOS policy to promote the rule of law (ROL) in the countries of Central America. It is part of the Root Causes Strategy (RCS), which has the stated, but now strongly doubted, purpose of stemming irregular migration into the US. According to the DOS, achieving ROL will entail superior economic performance, and thus mitigate the incentives for “irregular” migration.
On its face, the DOS argument makes sense. It has been credibly argued in economic papers that ROL strongly correlates with superior economic performance (examples here, here, and here). Leaving aside the question of whether economic growth precedes or follows the quality-upgrade of institutions, every country wants economic growth. So, who could be against the rule of law?
Before answering this question, it is important to be clear. The international literature has a bias, a reasonable one. ROL implies a liberal system of governance, i.e. a republican democracy. Once a miniscule portion of the total of political regimes in the world, non-autocratic nations now constitute a significant portion of the political regimes in the world. However, it should be noted that there is a recent uptick in the number of autocracies in the world.
Do liberal regimes really have superior economic performance vis-à-vis illiberal regimes? Whereas earlier studies found no significant effects of democracy on growth, later studies have found a positive relationship between democracy and growth. Problematic outliers, such as China, do exist. China is an autocratic country that achieved unparalleled growth rates between 1980 and 2010, lifting millions of people out of poverty, without relying on democratic reforms or substantial social programs. China did this on the basis of sheer economic growth, and population control.
The China case occasions a legitimate question for DOS policy. Whereas the DOS pushes the argument that the lack of ROL disincentives investment, growth and thus promotes illegal (a term DOS refuses to use) immigration, the US continues to strongly invest and trade with China. It does so even as it lambasts countries such as Guatemala, a non-autocratic country. US trade in goods with China exceeded $657 billion in 2021, and its investment position grew over 1000% between 2000 and 2020, according to calculations based on data from Statista. Still, the DOS is fond of pushing the ABC line in Guatemala: Anybody But China. This contradiction is not lost on Guatemalans.
Even assuming that liberal regimes have superior ROL and economic performance, this begs the following question: What is meant by the rule of law? According to Britannica, ROL refers to the institutions and processes that secure a nonarbitrary form of government. It seems fair to say that an objective understanding of ROL entails strict limits on discretionary use of legal power for political ends. On that, it would seem that an international consensus among democratic nations could form. After all, autocracies are characterized by the discretionary use of political power.
However, rule of law is often in the eye of the observer. In the case of countries such as Guatemala, the observers are the US, and the international organizations and NGO´s that the US employs to further its policy objectives.
The US´ own problems with the ROL are well known abroad. Guatemalans closely follow American political affairs. For example, for all its talk about stemming “irregular” migration, it is perceived that the Biden administration is letting everyone in the US who wants to come in, and that this has led to the collapse of the US immigration system. The US government suspends its own laws, and then shifts the burden to countries like Guatemala to solve the ensuing migration problems.
Many Guatemalans have reasonable doubts as to what the US means by ROL. Guatemalans are quite aware that the US government has in recent years acted against the political opposition with questionable measures such as tax oppression, political espionage, falsified documents in secret courts. When the US government speaks of the need to have independent prosecutors to eradicate corruption, many take note of the fact that this same standard does not apply to US presidents, who are free to choose attorneys general close to them. Whereas the DOS critiques what it regards as the degradation of press freedom in Guatemala, the recent initiative to create an agency under the guise of Homeland Security to fight disinformation strikes many Guatemalans as frankly soviet.
So, when the US voices its displeasure on the lack of commitment to the ROL in Guatemala, it generates confusion. US-Guatemala relations are at a critical juncture of incommensurability. Frankly, there is a lack of trust and understanding on what the US means by ROL.
With China´s presence in the region growing rapidly, the US needs to establish clear communications and expectations with its key local allies. American soft power is significantly enhanced when the US treats its allies with respect and, more importantly, when the US practices what it preaches abroad.
On the Rule of Law in Guatemala
Leaving aside the question of whether economic growth precedes or follows the quality-upgrade of institutions, every country wants economic growth. So, who could be against the rule of law?
US policies on immigration and its relations in general with key Central American nations are in deep disarray. The US has “lost” El Salvador, Honduras has elected a socialist government with strong inclinations towards communist China, and its own policies are driving away its last, most loyal partner in the region, Guatemala. According to the US State Department (DOS), Guatemala is backsliding on its commitment to democracy and anti-corruption.
It is the stated DOS policy to promote the rule of law (ROL) in the countries of Central America. It is part of the Root Causes Strategy (RCS), which has the stated, but now strongly doubted, purpose of stemming irregular migration into the US. According to the DOS, achieving ROL will entail superior economic performance, and thus mitigate the incentives for “irregular” migration.
On its face, the DOS argument makes sense. It has been credibly argued in economic papers that ROL strongly correlates with superior economic performance (examples here, here, and here). Leaving aside the question of whether economic growth precedes or follows the quality-upgrade of institutions, every country wants economic growth. So, who could be against the rule of law?
Before answering this question, it is important to be clear. The international literature has a bias, a reasonable one. ROL implies a liberal system of governance, i.e. a republican democracy. Once a miniscule portion of the total of political regimes in the world, non-autocratic nations now constitute a significant portion of the political regimes in the world. However, it should be noted that there is a recent uptick in the number of autocracies in the world.
Do liberal regimes really have superior economic performance vis-à-vis illiberal regimes? Whereas earlier studies found no significant effects of democracy on growth, later studies have found a positive relationship between democracy and growth. Problematic outliers, such as China, do exist. China is an autocratic country that achieved unparalleled growth rates between 1980 and 2010, lifting millions of people out of poverty, without relying on democratic reforms or substantial social programs. China did this on the basis of sheer economic growth, and population control.
The China case occasions a legitimate question for DOS policy. Whereas the DOS pushes the argument that the lack of ROL disincentives investment, growth and thus promotes illegal (a term DOS refuses to use) immigration, the US continues to strongly invest and trade with China. It does so even as it lambasts countries such as Guatemala, a non-autocratic country. US trade in goods with China exceeded $657 billion in 2021, and its investment position grew over 1000% between 2000 and 2020, according to calculations based on data from Statista. Still, the DOS is fond of pushing the ABC line in Guatemala: Anybody But China. This contradiction is not lost on Guatemalans.
Even assuming that liberal regimes have superior ROL and economic performance, this begs the following question: What is meant by the rule of law? According to Britannica, ROL refers to the institutions and processes that secure a nonarbitrary form of government. It seems fair to say that an objective understanding of ROL entails strict limits on discretionary use of legal power for political ends. On that, it would seem that an international consensus among democratic nations could form. After all, autocracies are characterized by the discretionary use of political power.
However, rule of law is often in the eye of the observer. In the case of countries such as Guatemala, the observers are the US, and the international organizations and NGO´s that the US employs to further its policy objectives.
The US´ own problems with the ROL are well known abroad. Guatemalans closely follow American political affairs. For example, for all its talk about stemming “irregular” migration, it is perceived that the Biden administration is letting everyone in the US who wants to come in, and that this has led to the collapse of the US immigration system. The US government suspends its own laws, and then shifts the burden to countries like Guatemala to solve the ensuing migration problems.
Many Guatemalans have reasonable doubts as to what the US means by ROL. Guatemalans are quite aware that the US government has in recent years acted against the political opposition with questionable measures such as tax oppression, political espionage, falsified documents in secret courts. When the US government speaks of the need to have independent prosecutors to eradicate corruption, many take note of the fact that this same standard does not apply to US presidents, who are free to choose attorneys general close to them. Whereas the DOS critiques what it regards as the degradation of press freedom in Guatemala, the recent initiative to create an agency under the guise of Homeland Security to fight disinformation strikes many Guatemalans as frankly soviet.
So, when the US voices its displeasure on the lack of commitment to the ROL in Guatemala, it generates confusion. US-Guatemala relations are at a critical juncture of incommensurability. Frankly, there is a lack of trust and understanding on what the US means by ROL.
With China´s presence in the region growing rapidly, the US needs to establish clear communications and expectations with its key local allies. American soft power is significantly enhanced when the US treats its allies with respect and, more importantly, when the US practices what it preaches abroad.