Delfino.cr is a digital Costa Rican journal with a daily circulation. It is managed by the writer Diego Delfino Machín. We are grateful to Diego for permission to reproduce his article here.

25 May 2022

Delfino.cr ,

diego@delfino.cr

Translated for The Violence of Development website by Martin Mowforth

The president of the republic, Rodrigo Chaves Robles, is in Davos, Switzerland, where for the first time he is attending the World Economic Forum in his capacity as representative of the country. The summit, which gathers delegates from all over the planet with a view to discussions on social and economic challenges facing the international community, took place from 23rd to 26^th May this year.

Our leader participated in the Latin American Presidential Panel (with Iván Duque of Colombia, Luis Abinader of Dominica and Dina Boluarte, Vice-President of Perú) in which in turn they discussed the region’s recovery after the pandemic.

The moderator of the fórum, Marisol Argueta de Barillas, addressing Chaves, made a comment on the Costa Rican situation. She flattered us all when she said that Costa Rica is known as a stable and secure nation with social equity and added: “You freed yourself from this serious wave produced by the pandemic, but there are also some growing risks which will lead to a complex period in your presidency.”

In his usual style, Chaves replied: “I haven’t been freed of anything, quite the contrary. Unfortunately I’m inheriting a situation that needs to be put right, contrary to what my colleagues (alluding to the other panellists) have commented on; Costa Rica isn’t doing so well, and we have even experienced a significant deterioration.”

He went on to say that he (in contrast to his colleagues) could not report successes because he’s only had 15 days in post, meaning that he’s only able to determine “the challenges and what we are going to do about them”. Among those that they have to address in Costa Rica are: the fiscal deficit, social inequality, poor quality of public services and dealing with contaminated waters.

Again he pointed out that he had received “a house in a mess” with “an inheritance of huge fiscal disorder”. Explaining that he will address this scenario, he said he hopes to generate public policy which puts an end to the historical beneficiaries of private monopolies in favour of “the vast majority of Costa Rican people”.

“We have to create more and better Jobs, and that might happen with a blow to the confidence of the private sector. In Costa Rica, for years we have been hearing about the false dichotomy between the private sector and the public sector. No, there hasn’t been a country anywhere in the world which has achieved prosperity with only the private sector or only the state sector.”

Later, Argueta tried again to flatter Costa Rica, this time referring to the country’s environmental policies. Chaves again rejected the flattery and noted that the country had not invested sufficiently in its sewage system and as a result of this its rivers are contaminated. Later he stated that we had over-invested in electricity generation “above all with fossil fuels”.

I don’t know where this observation came from, considering that 99 per cent of the electricity that is consumed in the country comes from renewable sources[1]; but I’m going to leave it at that; I’m not going to lay myself open to government accusations of being a member of the gutter press tied to political and economic interests and ….. ZZZZ

Anyway, yes, it is certain that our rivers are suffering and our sewage system is even worse. In fact, our list of environmental grievances is not modest. Perhaps it isn’t fashionable for a president to air the dirty clothes for all the neighbours to see and it parades for all to see the environmental discourse of Alvarado[2], receiving praise from the future king of England less than a year ago. But at least Chaves, on assuming the presidency, has not modified his campaign tone.

Indeed so, and he made it clear that he does not want to go back on what has been put forward on this theme. He said, “Costa Rica is a country that is not going to take one step backwards in its commitments and its wishes to reach carbon neutrality.”

As a part of his intervention, Chaves also said that he has been talking with investors and that he told them that ‘Costa Rica is open for business’ and that he intends to break all the bottlenecks to investment in the country and create a better environment [for business]. Effectively, Chaves himself had stated that the principal aim of his trip to the World Economic Forum is to seek jobs and investments for Costa Rica.

Let’s hope, then, that on his return to Costa Rica he comes back with a little list of useful telephone numbers; that good foreign investment may arrive; that it will offer good jobs; that regulation will be attractive for investors and respectful of the rights of the labour force; and that will genuinely begin to give form to a more equitable Costa Rica that we miss so much.

[1]  Editor’s note: over 70 per cent of Costa Rica’s electricity is generated as hydroelectricity, and as ENCA newsletters have made clear in the past, the environmental credentials of damming rivers are open to public debate.

[2]  Carlos Alvarado was the outgoing President of Costa Rica who handed over to Rodrigo Chaves in April this year, 2022.

Delfino.cr es una revista digital costarricense con una circulación diaria. Es administrada por el escritor Diego Delfino Machín. Le estamos muy agradecido a Diego por la autorización para reproducir el artículo aquí.

25 Mayo 2022

Delfino.cr

diego@delfino.cr

Como recordarán, el presidente de la república, Rodrigo Chaves Robles, se encuentra en Davos, Suiza, donde asiste por primera vez al Foro Económico Mundial en su calidad de representante del país. El encuentro, que reúne a delegaciones de países de todo el orbe a fin de charlar sobre retos sociales y económicos de la comunidad internacional arrancó el domingo pasado y terminará este jueves.

El mandatario participó ayer del Panel Presidencial de Latinoamérica (con Iván Duque de Colombia, Luis Abinader de Dominicada y Dina Boluarte, vicepresidenta de Perú) en el cual se discutió en torno a la recuperación de la zona tras la pandemia.

La moderadora del espacio, Marisol Argueta de Barillas, dirigiéndose a Chaves, hizo un comentario sobre la situación costarricense. Nos piropeó diciendo que Costa Rica es conocida como una nación estable, segura y con equidad social y dijo: “Usted se libró de esta ola tan grave que ha producido la pandemia, pero también existen algunos riesgos emergentes y va a corresponder un periodo complejo en su presidencia”.

Fiel a su estilo, Chaves contestó: “Yo no me libré de nada, al revés. Estoy heredando lo que hay que corregir porque, desafortunadamente, al contrario de las experiencias que han comentado mis colegas (aludiendo a los otros panelistas), Costa Rica no lo hizo tan bien y, más bien, hemos tenido un deterioro importante”.

Luego dijo que él (también a diferencia de sus colegas) no podía reportar éxitos porque solo tiene 15 días al frente del país, por lo que solo estaba en capacidad de puntualizar en torno a “los desafíos y qué vamos a hacer”. Acto seguido abordó varias de las principales problemáticas que ha encontrado en Costa Rica: déficit fiscal, inequidad social, mala calidad de servicios públicos y trato de aguas negras.

Una vez más señaló que recibió “una casa muy desordenada” con “una herencia de muchísimo desorden fiscal”. Explicando cómo enfrentará ese escenario dijo que espera generar política pública que acabe con quienes se han beneficiado históricamente de monopolios privados para el beneficio de “la inmensa mayoría del pueblo costarricense”.
“Tenemos que generar más y mejores empleos, y eso pasa por dar un golpe de confianza al sector privado. En Costa Rica, la falsa dicotomía que veníamos oyendo por años era sector privado o sector público. No, no ha habido un país en la historia del mundo que haya logrado prosperidad solo con el sector privado o solo con el Estado”. 

Más adelante Argueta intentó piropear de nuevo a Costa Rica, esta vez hablando de la política ambiental del país. Chaves tampoco le recibió esa miel pues acotó que el país no invirtió lo suficiente en alcantarillado y como resultado sus ríos están contaminados. Luego dijo que sobreinvertimos en generación eléctrica “sobre todo con combustibles fósiles”.

No sé a qué vino esa observación tomando en cuenta que el 99% de la electricidad que se consume en el país viene de fuentes renovables pero lo voy a dejar ahí, no vaya a ser que vuelva a saltar alguna persona afín al gobierno acusándome de ser prensa canalla plegada a intereses políticos y económicos y… ZZZZ.

— Dicho lo cual: sí es cierto que nuestros ríos dan pena y que nuestro sistema de alcantarillado da todavía más pena. De hecho, nuestra lista de agravios ambientales no es nada modesta. Quizá no se estila que un presidente ventile la ropa sucia frente a todo el vecindario y se pasee por el discurso ambientalista que tenía a Alvarado recibiendo vítores del futuro rey de Inglaterra hace menos de un año pero al menos a Chaves hay que darle que es consecuente y que asumir la presidencia no le hizo modificar su tono de campaña.

Eso sí, el presidente dejó claro que no piensa revertir lo que se ha avanzado en la materia, pues dijo: “Costa Rica es un país que no va a echar para atrás en sus compromisos y en sus deseos de alcanzar neutralidad del carbono”. 

Como parte de su intervención Chaves también dijo que ha estado conversando con inversionistas y que les ha dicho que “Costa Rica is open for business” y que les va a romper todos los “cuellos de botella” para invertir en el país en un mejor ambiente. En efecto, el propio Chaves había adelantado que el principal objetivo de su viaje al Foro Económico Mundial es buscar empleos e inversiones para Costa Rica.

Ojalá pues, que a su regreso, el próximo jueves, venga con una agendilla de teléfonos más cargada que la de los Hombres G. Que llegue buena inversión extranjera. Que ofrezca buenos empleos. Que la regulación sea atractiva para los inversionistas y cuidadosa con los derechos de la fuerza laboral. Que de verdad empecemos a darle forma a esa Costa Rica más equitativa que tanto añoramos.

By Martin Mowforth

On 30 December 2021 Salvadoran president Nayib Bukele announced on Twitter that a new national stadium would be built in Antiguo Cuscatlán on land currently used by the Military School. He said the construction project would be with the direct collaboration of the president of China, Xi Jinping, although no mention was made of the costs involved.

Bukele indicated that the new stadium would have a seated capacity of 50,000 compared with the old Cuscatlán stadium’s capacity of 34,000. President Bukele did not mention anything about the costs of the stadium construction, but it is expected to amount to $500 million (USD).

The Salvadoran Ecological Unit (UNES), however, has expressed concerns about the project. Prime among these are:

• The production of a meaningful environmental impact assessment which would ensure that the project was not simply imposed on the people.
• The possible implications for water supply and the recharging of the water table – a covered stadium surrounded by a concrete car park will reduce retention and diminish groundwater supplies
• The micro-climatic changes of temperature brought about in this area as a result of the building.
• Possible drainage and flooding problems in the low-lying area of the affected zone.

Luis Gónzalez of UNES explained that this type of project has often given rise to environmental abuse in the areas affected by these ’developments’, at a time when the country has so many other problems that should be prioritised. But he said: “We have a State that is incapable of responding to these needs, but which instead approves laws that privatise the provision of water in El Salvador.”

Additionally the stadium will be built in a protected natural area, described as “the last important forest” of the metropolitan area of San Salvador. According to the Salvadoran media, Julio César Acosta, an expert in wildlife observation, says that the El Espino forest is characterized by a great diversity of flora and fauna, including over 150 species of birds, two of which are seriously threatened with extinction: the yellow-headed parrot and the white-fronted parrot.

Construction is scheduled to start during 2022, but that seems especially optimistic given that there has not yet been a feasibility study or environmental impact study.

Sources

Karla Ramírez, 30.12.21, ‘Anuncian la construcción de un nuevo estadio con donación de China en terreno de Escuela Militar’, La Prensa Gráfica.

 Verónica Martínez, 31.12.21, ‘Ambientalistas temen daño medioambiental por construcción de nuevo estadio de fútbol’, La Prensa Gráfica.

Rafal Zagrobelny, 15.01.22, ‘El Salvador: Construction of the national stadium will start soon?’ StadiumDB.com

Nicaragua has begun the process of leaving the OAS which organisation Nicaragua accuses of undermining and subverting the process of democracy in that country and elsewhere. Certainly the OAS has been at the forefront of intense criticism of the Nicaraguan government to put it mildly. It would seem to be a significant step for any Latin American country to take, and so it is appropriate to at least record the event in this website under the heading ‘Selected political developments in Central America’. TeleSur published the letter sent by the Nicaraguan government to the OAS and we reproduce the letter here by way of outlining the reasoning behind the Nicaraguan government’s action. Clearly, the OAS would refute the claims made in the letter.

Published by TeleSur,19 November 2021

This Central American country resigned from being part of an organisation through which the United States tries to impose its hegemony and overwhelm the will of the peoples.

On Friday, Nicaragua’s Foreign Affairs Minister Denis Moncada announced his country’s decision to leave the Organisation of American States (OAS). The following is the letter sent by the Nicaraguan government to the OAS Secretary Luis Almagro:

1. Taking into account the “Declaration of the National Assembly in the face of the repeated actions of interference of the Organisation of American States in the Internal Affairs of the State of Nicaragua”, No. 05-2021; the Declaration of the Caucus of Congressmen and Women before the Central American Parliament of the State of Nicaragua, both of 16th November, 2021; Agreement No. 126 of the Supreme Court of Justice, of 17th November, 2021; and the Agreement of Proclamation and Adhesion of the Supreme Electoral Council of November, 2021, urging the President of the Republic, in his capacity as Head of State and Head of Government, to Denounce the Charter of the Organisation of American States, in accordance to the mechanism stipulated in Art. 143, of said Instrument.
2. Likewise, in accordance with Article 129 of the Political Constitution of Nicaragua, which provides that the Legislative, Executive, Judicial and Electoral Powers are independent from each other and harmoniously coordinated, subordinated only to the supreme interests of the Nation and to what is established within the Constitution:
3. In my capacity as Minister of Foreign Affairs, as instructed by the Constitutional President of the Republic of Nicaragua, Commander Daniel Ortega Saavedra and in accordance with Article 67 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, I am writing to officially notify you of our unwavering decision to denounce the Charter of the Organisation of American States (OAS), in accordance with Article 143, which initiates the Definitive Withdrawal and Resignation of Nicaragua from this Organisation.
4. Nicaragua promotes and defends respect for the principles that govern International Law; compliance with the Charter of the United Nations, its principles and purposes, aimed at respecting the sovereign equality among States, non­-interference in internal affairs, abstention from the use of force or the threat of use of force and the non-imposition of unilateral, illegal and coercive measures; principles that the OAS is obliged to comply with, but irresponsibly ignores, in violation of its own Charter.
5. The Organisation of American States has been designed as a diplomatic political forum, born under the influence of the United States, as an instrument of interference and intervention and its actions against Nicaragua have shown that this organisation, which operates permanently in Washington, has as its mission to facilitate the hegemony of the United States with its interventionism against the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean. Which is unacceptable for Nicaragua and which we reject and condemn.
6. Nicaragua has repeatedly expressed its condemnation and rejection of the interventionist actions of the OAS, defending its sovereignty, independence and self-determination and the Right of the Nicaraguan People to freely choose their Government and to define their sovereign policies, which is the exclusive responsibility of Nicaraguans, respecting their Internal legal system, Nicaraguan institutionality, and International Law.

7 . We do not view ourselves as a Colony of any Power, and we claim National Dignity and Decorum, in legitimate defense of our Independence, Sovereignty and Self-determination, in the face of aggressive actions, violations of the UN Charter and International Law by the Organisation of American States, the United States of North America and of other Colonialist and Neocolonialist Entities, which at this point in Life, believe that they have the power to subdue and humiliate our Worthy People and Government.

8. The Dignified People and Government of Nicaragua resign to be a part of this captive organisation in Washington, instrumentalized in favor of North American interests, becoming an architect of interference and disagreement, to the detriment of the Peoples of Latin America and the Caribbean.
9. This Note constitutes our unwavering manifesto and decision to Denounce the Charter of the Organisation of American States (OAS), so that its harmful international effects against Nicaragua may cease. Therefore, as Depositary, you must immediately communicate to the Member States, Nicaragua’s Irrevocable, Dignified and Patriotic decision of Denunciation and Resignation, in the face of interference and the unfriendly and aggressive actions of this Organisation, of subordinate Governments of the United States and of the Secretary General, against the Free and Sovereign Motherland of Sandino and Dario.
10. I subscribe, reaffirming that Nicaragua bases its Denunciation of the OAS Charter, its Resignation and Withdrawal from this Organisation, on Article 1 of our Political Constitution, which establishes that: “Independence, sovereignty and national self-determination are inalienable rights of the people and foundations of the Nicaraguan nation. Any foreign interference in the internal affairs of Nicaragua or any attempt to undermine those rights, threatens the life of the people.

It is the duty of all Nicaraguans to preserve and defend these rights.” Likewise, it is based on the above-mentioned, Sovereign Declaration of the National Assembly; on Agreement No. 126 of the Supreme Court of Justice; on the Agreement of Proclamation and Adhesion of the Supreme Electoral Council; on the Declaration of the Caucus of Congressmen and Women before the Central American Parliament, for the State of Nicaragua; and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

As instructed by the President of the Republic Commander Daniel Ortega Saavedra, in defense of dignity.

Denis Ronaldo Moncada Colines

Minister of Foreign Affairs

Republic of Nicaragua

Since El Salvador adopted the US Dollar as the country’s main currency, both sides of the political spectrum have questioned the lack of economic autonomy that comes with being tied to the US Federal Reserve. Now as President Bukele pushes for the formal adoption of bitcoin as legal tender, Doug Specht writes on the political, economic, and environmental implications of such a move. This article has previously appeared in Geographical Magazine and the newsletter of the Environmental Network for Central America, and is reproduced here with kind permission of the author.

On 9th June 2021, El Salvador’s congress approved President Nayib Bukele’s proposal for Bitcoin, one of the world’s largest cryptocurrencies, to become legal tender within the nation. This will move the currency from a form of payment that businesses can choose to accept (Bitcoin is already legal in El Salvador, as it is in most countries) to one that they have to accept. Celebrating his win, Bukele quickly changed his profile picture on Twitter to one in which lasers are shining from his eyes, a move that did not go unnoticed by other crypto enthusiasts such as Elon Musk. To these enthusiasts, the act is seen as paving the way for Bitcoin to become more mainstream and accessible. Others, though, question why any government would wish to link themselves to a currency that sees wild volatility—in the week following the Salvadoran Congress’ approval, Bitcoin’s value fluctuated between US$38,200 and US$31,428, having previously hit more than US$58,000 through May.

So why would Bukele want to bring such a currency to the country? The reasons are complex and multifaceted. First, Bukele has earned a reputation of being technologically savvy and paints himself as much a social media star as a president. This, along with his promises to be radically different from the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN) and the Alianza Republicana Nacionalista (ARENA), political parties that have dominated Salvadoran politics since the end of the Salvadoran Civil War, helped him win over young voters in 2019, leading to his election. Bukele enjoys announcing his ideas and policies on Twitter. Unlike former US president Donald Trump, though, his content is clever and nuanced and often draws upon longstanding Internet jokes and memes. Although Bukele’s personal futurist ambitions are surely the catalyst for this move, it is El Salvador’s complex financial and political history that have paved the way for the adoption of Bitcoin.

In 2001, El Salvador moved away from its own currency—the colón, which was adopted in 1892—and made the US dollar its legal, and only, currency. Although places such as Ecuador undertook dollarization to stem runaway inflation, El Salvador’s move was less driven by a moment of economic crisis—though it did reduce interest rates in the short term. Instead, it was the consequences of living in the United States’ backyard that forced El Salvador’s hand. Political turmoil, the bloody civil war, and US foreign policy led to the emigration of many Salvadorans to the United States. This saw trade links and remittances grow as expats transferred dollars back to El Salvador. In 2016, these remittances accounted for 17 percent of El Salvador’s GDP, around US$4.6 billion. The US has also accounted for up to 60 percent of El Salvador’s export trade. These transactions were smoothed by dollarization, but as the colón stopped circulating, El Salvador’s central bank ceased to have any role in monetary policy, with this now resting in the US Federal Reserve’s hands. The long-term benefits to El Salvador have been questioned, and many have called for the end of the US dollar in El Salvador and for the country to regain control of its reserves.

Bukele has announced this regaining of control, as well as both the boosting of the economy and increased ease of transferring remittances as reasons for Bitcoin adoption. However, his assertion that the Salvadoran GDP will increase by 25 percent if 1 percent of Bitcoin is invested in the country has been widely questioned by economists, who note that his cited Bitcoin market cap of US$680 billion is unstable and that most bitcoin owners will not be looking to invest in El Salvador. Furthermore, given that El Salvador has one of the lowest rates of Internet connectivity in the Americas, it is hard to see how the wider population will be able to embrace Bitcoin for the collection of remittances or otherwise.

If the economic reasons for Bitcoin adoption are questionable, it might still be seen as a politically astute move. Talk of smoothing remittances will win over overseas voters. It will also be seen as a step towards further independence from the US, a policy that can win votes on both the political left and right. El Salvador might have been economically better off if it had adopted a cryptocurrency that was more stable, but these, being linked one to one to the US dollar, would have been much less of a political statement.

As a way to court voters, though, with perhaps little real economic gain, the adoption of Bitcoin might have some deeply significant and very real impacts on the lives of Salvadorans—unintended consequences of Bukele’s desire to appear ultra-modern. The digital mining of Bitcoin, like other crypto currencies, involves – in simple terms – using sophisticated and high-powered computers to solve extremely complex computational maths problems, the completion of which is rewarded with the production of a new bitcoin which can be store in a digital wallet, and then used for purchases and trading. This process is hugely power intensive, using dozens of terawatts of electricity per year—more than the whole of countries such as the Netherlands. And with a large amount of Bitcoin mining taking place where electricity is the cheapest, the environmental impact is huge.

China has the most Bitcoin mining facilities of any country by far, and although the country has been slowly moving toward renewable energy, about two-thirds of its electricity comes from coal. The Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance estimates a single transaction of Bitcoin has the same carbon footprint as 680,000 Visa transactions. Other currencies such as Ethereum have made promises of being more environmentally friendly, but with little oversight of the crypto-mining industry these promises are hard to measure.

With El Salvador being highly susceptible to climate change, pushing for the use of such an environmentally damaging currency seems short-sighted. The World Bank already predicts that weather-related events and other hazards caused by climate change mean El Salvador is incurring annual losses of around 2.5 percent GDP. Severe weather events driven by climate change have also led to a significant loss of life, habitats, and biodiversity in the last 30 years. Unregulated and unabated crypto mining will further drive climate change, making living in many parts of the world increasingly difficult, including Central America.

Bukele claims to be bringing El Salvador into the future with cryptocurrency. His choice of Bitcoin, though, rather than those that claim more environmental credentials or those that are securely connected to the US dollar, suggest that this is little more than a political gimmick—and one that could have serious environmental consequences that cannot be outweighed by any financial gains.

(Have we seen this somewhere before?)

By Martin Mowforth for The Violence of Development website – with thanks to the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (CISPES – www.cispes.org) and their newsletters. May 2021

Key words: El Salvador; President Bukele; New Ideas party; democracy; separation of powers; dictatorship; public approval.

If anyone had any doubts about President Bukele’s intentions to tear down any government institutions that could oppose him, he made them abundantly clear on Saturday, 1^st May. On the first day of El Salvador’s new legislative term, Bukele’s New Ideas party, which now has an overwhelming majority, moved quickly to illegally sack all the members of the Supreme Court’s Constitutional Chamber and the Attorney General, who were quickly replaced in a midnight session.

The decision to remove and replace the five magistrates failed to comply with the constitutionally-established justifications for doing so, and the magistrates were not granted a hearing and defence, as is their right under law.

It is clear that the basis of the decision was to eliminate any institutional opposition and to convert all of the branches of government into instruments of the president. This explains why the same legislators also removed the Attorney General, Raúl Melara and next may remove the Human Rights Ombudsman, José Apolonio Tobar Serrano, who, during the pandemic, denounced widespread violations of human rights and corruption among many members of the Bukele administration.

US Vice President Kamala Harris rejected the actions of El Salvador’s President for dismissing his country’s Attorney General and Supreme Court judges. “Washington is concerned about El Salvador’s democracy. An independent judiciary is vital to a healthy democracy and a strong economy,” Harris tweeted.[i]

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken also reacted to Bukele’s decision to remove Salvadoran Attorney General Raúl Melara.”We urge President Bukele not to interrupt El Salvador’s democratic path, respect the separation of powers, defend the press, and support the private sector,” he said.

The Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (CISPES) remarked that: “Condescending lectures from the Biden administration will not impede [these] assaults on democracy; President Bukele and his party are very clear on the type of dictatorship they wish to establish in El Salvador. If the United States government does not immediately act to restrict police, military, and other funds that strengthen the regime, there is no doubt that the United States, too, will be responsible for what follows.”[ii]

Meanwhile, as the following table shows, the President’s approval rating has remained high since he became president. In all the surveys conducted since taking office, Bukele has received a rating or score of over 75 percent. The table below shows just those polls conducted so far in 2021.[iii]

[i]  Telesur (3 May 2021) ‘Kamala Harris Rejects Actions of the President of El Salvador’.

[ii]  https://www.cispes.org/article/cispes-condemns-technical-coup-detat-el-salvador

[iii]  https://elsalvadorinfo.net/nayib-bukele-approval-rate/

By Martin Mowforth, March 2021

Guatemala gained its independence from Spain in 1821 and claims that it inherited Spain’s original claim to a large part of what is now Belizean territory – see map. Belize gained its independence from the UK in 1981 and argues that the borders were defined by an 1859 boundary convention between the UK and Guatemala.

In April 2018, over 95% of Guatemalan voters (with a low turnout of only 25%) voted in favour of referring the decision about the border dispute to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) based in The Hague, although the two countries had already, in 2008, agreed to allow the ICJ to resolve the dispute. In April 2019, Belizeans also approved the reference of the dispute to the ICJ by a 55% to 45% majority.

Relations between the two current governments are cordial and on 8^th March this year (2021) the Latin America News Dispatch reported that officials from the two governments  met at the disputed border between the two countries on 4^th March, the first time that such a meeting has taken place. In the meeting, which took place at an Organisation of American States (OAS) office, Belize Foreign Minister Eamon Courtenay and his Guatemalan counterpart Pedro Brolo Villa expressed a shared desire to improve relations between the two countries, which have deteriorated because of the border dispute. Since independence, Guatemala has claimed all or part of the territory of Belize.

Despite the cordial governmental relations, the last two decades have witnessed various illegal incursions and resource thefts by Guatemalans in the disputed territory and numerous killings of Guatemalan squatters by Belizean civilians and soldiers. At times even air travel between the two countries has been affected.

The ICJ is currently analyzing briefs submitted by each country.