Luis Guillermo Solís, former president of Costa Rica: “So far the institutions of my country have sustained, but that can change”

In the midst of the Central American tragedy of dictatorships, wars and politicians of doubtful liberal vein, Costa Rica has been an island whose democracy is admired. That seems to change acceleratedly under the leadership of the current president, Rodrigo Chaves, a populist who remains at permanent war with the judicial system, the parliament and the media. Luis Guillermo Solís (San José, 67 years old), former president of that country, political scientist and historian, analyzes the setback of his small nation and the threats he faces. In this conversation conducted in Guatemala in the framework of the Central America Festival, the ex -president withdrawn from politics also talks about the inability of the region of reaching a unit agreement, the painful problem of migration and criticizes the Central American, selfish elites and unable to contraify the formation of more equitable societies.

Ask. You coordinate the editorial project Central America accountswhich analyzes issues considered torales in the region. If I had to choose at this time an issue that worries you the most, what would it be?

Answer. Without a doubt, migrations, because it is very sensitive to the human cost it has. I still think that people do not migrate, but is expelled from their countries for poverty, for violence, for disasters. I find it hard to imagine the pain that a person and his family suffer by having to necessarily abandon the place where he resides.

P. Use a very strong word, which is to expel. Hundreds of Central Americans are under the fear of being expelled from the United States. Costa Rica has already agreed to receive airplanes with deportees. How should Central American countries respond to this Washington policy?

R. I think that if possible, although that will not happen, there must be a more orderly response from the Central American governments and the best could have done it through the Central American Integration System (SICA), which would be logical. Secondly, given the policy of repression of the migration of the Trump administration, each country must ensure that the conditions under which the expelled are adequate, as well as the shelters while looking for a definitive destination. What cannot be allowed is that transport in subhuman conditions and that once they reach our countries their rights are also violated.

P. Do you agree with the decision of President Chaves to receive these migrants expelled from the United States?

R. Under those conditions, but in adequate conditions. I prefer that migrants reach a place where they are attended well, to be expelled to their countries without knowing what are the risks they face. I think that Costa Rica can be a good intermediate point, but I demand that the country that receives them has both the appropriate and clear conditions of the procedure to house them, because if not what will happen is an accumulation of migrants that can have very serious consequences.

P. Talk about the Sica. Why have the governments of Central America cost them so much to agree on a common strategy against the blackmail of President Trump?

R. In that matter and in all. It is part of the problems that the SICA has, whose instruments, which must be based on a mature integration process, lack national supra capacity to guarantee compliance with the agreements. This is a problem of origin and, in addition, of lack of political will of governments to understand that there are certain phenomena such as migration, environmental issues, organized crime, which could be better managed in a regional integration environment.

P. Mention problems of origin, does the sica work?

R. Not now. It could work, yes. It could work better, too. We are dragging an unfortunate anti -integrationist drift that deepened after the hurricane MITCH In 1998. That hurts a lot because it was a moment of great optimism in Central America after the peace agreements and because the integration initiative had had remarkable progress, but now, with a dictatorship in Nicaragua and an autocratic government in El Salvador, that process is paralyzed. The Sica does not even have a general secretary and all governments have turned their backs.

P. Why has such a small region be integrated?

R. Because structural difficulties are very large. Certain levels of harmonies are needed in the management of structural issues, such as economic development, fiscal policy, social policy. And where there is deficit, as happened in Europe, conditions are needed to establish countries that have less relative development, approach those who have the most. In Central America, asymmetries within the system are so large, including security issues, which has become almost impossible to find those necessary harmonies so that the system has a certain level of stability.

P. This is a literature and journalism festival, an attacked profession. Persecution in El Salvador; exile, banishment and jail in Nicaragua and Guatemala; with accusations from the president in Costa Rica against the press. If I could talk to the Central American leaders on this issue, what would you recommend?

R. That we should not return to the dark years when the repression and violation of human rights was the common currency in the area. I am truly worried that in a country like Costa Rica the president accuses the press of being scoundrel for the simple fact that he is opposed. We have all gone through that and it is not pleasant to be seen in the first flat of the newspapers with critical observations, but that is part of the democratic coexistence, such as the weights and counterweights that arise from the institutionality of a republican regime. We are seeing, and I say this with trepidation, not only that the progress that had been achieved has been paralyzed, but that we are facing a quick setback, in which some of these autocratic or populist governments have the support of a very important sector of the population, which has bought them the story that the destruction of institutions and the shortcomings of democracy must reach authoritarian levels that solve the problems that those democracies have.

P. And how should we understand that support? Why does a president as the Salvadoran Nayib Bukele have such a high approval level?

R. Because the phenomena that countries face economic, structural, legal, judicial and security are of such magnitude and institutions have been so weak that they have postponed until they become true torments for the population. No doubt that Salvadorans see the Bukele criminal repression policy as a good response against the maras and organized crime.

P. What has democracy failed when the population has not been able to guarantee security and well -being?

R. It is that democracy does not do that. What allows democracy to work are the leaderships that execute it and the truth is that in Central America we have had leaderships that have been bad. And here he gives his hand to the Central American elites, who have been very unable to contribute the vision, resources and will to change that reality. In the eighties we achieved peace despite those elites. And once those agreements passed, we had to rebuild and in many cases refound those democracies and that did not happen. There is a continuation of the elites in power that still hinder the constitution of more equitable societies.

P. Costa Rica is going through a serious moment, with President Chaves at open war against the Judiciary in the face of the risk of losing his immunity due to a corruption case. Do you fear a democratic setback in your country?

R. Yes of course. And I think it is taking place. Certain decisions that have been clearly made against the existence of two great pillars that have guaranteed our inner peace: a public education of good quality and social security, which offers public health services and a pension regime that improve the quality of life of people. And, in addition, there is that confrontation not only strong, but would say that it is already violent between the Judiciary and the President. Last week President Chaves almost reached a call to weapons, which has been repudiated by people.

P. The president has loaded against justice. “They screwed up!” Is the institutionality of Costa Rica strong enough to face the president’s onslaught?

R. It was more than that, which is the final insult that the president uses frequently. He said that he had 17,000 police officers at his orders and that a civil war in Costa Rica could happen again. It is a very clear threat. It also has a permanent complaint of political order with the Legislative Assembly, with the media, with political parties, with opponents and human rights violations are taking place.

P. Is Costa Rican institutions strong to support these onslaught?

R. So far it has been. I give him two examples. One of the most popular cases was environmental destruction in the Costa Rican Caribbean area, where a president’s financier was authorized to make a housing complex and the complaints of the press managed to stop it. The same has been in the judicial part, with attempts to undermine the Comptroller General of the Republic, which is an organ that collaborates to the Legislative Assembly in doing political control. So far the institutions have sustained, but that can change. That is, institutions, as with political conditions, can deteriorate very quickly.