“Northern Triangle: DOD and State Need Improved Policies to Address Equipment Misuse” (arc) is a recent report from a federal agency talking about some of the military aid executive branch agencies are handing out to those countries (and how it seems to be frequently getting misused, but it’s hard to say how frequently because there’s usually no policies on what exactly constitutes misuse or who to report it to)
This whole book but especially chapter 1 talks about how the DHS, State Department, and Defense Department supply and train police forces in Honduras El Salvador and Columbia which have numerous reports of human rights abuses against them - chapter one of this book covers a ton of this in the northern triangle area of South America specifically - https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/672038/soldiers-and-kings-by-jason-de-leon/
In the first report (the one from the GAO), it says that the DOD provided equipment to countries between 2018 and 2021 and that those countries used it to intimidate diplomats from the US, and more generally that the equipment was not used as intended. The report makes 5 recommendations to the defense secretary, 3 of which currently in the way of being applied by the DOD.
The second reference, if I understand it correctly, tries to analyze the efficiency of US military aid, and states that even though this aid might not be as efficient as we think, is still useful to the president of the US as some kind of PR tool - it gives the impression the US is doing something.
The last reference is a book on Amazon that I can’t read nor browse.
I agree with you that the United States’ policy record with regards to South American countries is awful in many ways and has been for at least 50 years. But I don’t see how the articles you cited are related to Kamala Harris immigration record. Furthermore I don’t see how they are related to her job as a vice president or as a senator.
The report makes 5 recommendations to the defense secretary, 3 of which
The DOD agreed were a good idea, there’s no indication they actually followed them. The remaining two they straight up refused.
The second reference, if I understand it correctly, tries to analyze the efficiency of US military aid
That’s something it mentions in passing, but it mainly focuses on how Presidents like military aid schemes because a) they have a ton of control over how the money Congress gives them for these things is actually spent (i.e. they can point out human rights abuses by the government Congress wants to aid or other foreign policy considerations and pause the spending if they care to do so) b) it’s an incredibly obscure and bureaucratic system of funds and equipment inventories and inter-agency task forces and such that’s difficult for journalists to follow and most Americans won’t care about anyway most of the time
The last reference is a book on Amazon that I can’t read nor browse.
Unfortunately I’m not a skilled enough pirate to have a good answer for that problem, but maybe find a copy through a library or something. It’s a MacArthur genius grant receiving anthropologist’s years long study of migrants and guides where he interviews a ton of them and immigration enforcers in all the different countries and comes across a bunch of different stories of human rights abuses carried out by Mexican and Central American authorities.
Any source to back that up?
Thanks for the links!
In the first report (the one from the GAO), it says that the DOD provided equipment to countries between 2018 and 2021 and that those countries used it to intimidate diplomats from the US, and more generally that the equipment was not used as intended. The report makes 5 recommendations to the defense secretary, 3 of which currently in the way of being applied by the DOD.
The second reference, if I understand it correctly, tries to analyze the efficiency of US military aid, and states that even though this aid might not be as efficient as we think, is still useful to the president of the US as some kind of PR tool - it gives the impression the US is doing something. The last reference is a book on Amazon that I can’t read nor browse.
I agree with you that the United States’ policy record with regards to South American countries is awful in many ways and has been for at least 50 years. But I don’t see how the articles you cited are related to Kamala Harris immigration record. Furthermore I don’t see how they are related to her job as a vice president or as a senator.
Letter from a lawmaker in the fall of 2022 complaining about another transfer of military equipment and pointing out that these problems haven’t been addressed - https://web.archive.org/web/20221111005914/https://torres.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/rep-torres-demands-action-secretaries-austin-blinken-following-continued
The DOD agreed were a good idea, there’s no indication they actually followed them. The remaining two they straight up refused.
That’s something it mentions in passing, but it mainly focuses on how Presidents like military aid schemes because a) they have a ton of control over how the money Congress gives them for these things is actually spent (i.e. they can point out human rights abuses by the government Congress wants to aid or other foreign policy considerations and pause the spending if they care to do so) b) it’s an incredibly obscure and bureaucratic system of funds and equipment inventories and inter-agency task forces and such that’s difficult for journalists to follow and most Americans won’t care about anyway most of the time
Unfortunately I’m not a skilled enough pirate to have a good answer for that problem, but maybe find a copy through a library or something. It’s a MacArthur genius grant receiving anthropologist’s years long study of migrants and guides where he interviews a ton of them and immigration enforcers in all the different countries and comes across a bunch of different stories of human rights abuses carried out by Mexican and Central American authorities.
A simple “no” would have sufficed.