Piercing the Propaganda Bubble in El Salvador

WOLA presents a new episode about El Salvador, coinciding with our awarding of our 2025 Human Rights Award to MOVIR, El Salvador’s Movement of Victims of the Regime, which supports victims and families of arbitrary detentions carried out by President Nayib Bukele’s government. In this conversation, Ricardo Valencia, assistant professor of public relations in the Department of Communications at California State University, Fullerton, explains why the current popularity of El Salvador’s authoritarian president rests on a surprisingly fragile foundation. Dr. Valencia, a former journalist in El Salvador and an expert on political and activist communications, explains that Bukele is facing several challenges to his rule that even a slick propaganda operation cannot paper over. These include a lackluster economy, mainstream voters’ discomfort with the regime’s celebrations of cruelty and imprisonment, Bukele’s relations with just one political party in the United States, the loss of emigration as an “escape valve” and a likely increase in deportations, and discontent with corruption. While Dr. Valencia doesn’t foresee Bukele’s downfall as imminent—he is very popular because of security gains and effective communications—the Salvadoran leader, he argues, is planting the seeds for a sharp drop in popularity. In the meantime, Valencia calls for constant, energetic accompaniment and defense of El Salvador’s beleaguered civil society, independent media, and others fighting for democratic institutions and rights.

A special episode as part of WOLA’s 2025 Human Rights Awards Month President Nayib Bukele’s government has jailed nearly 2 percent of El Salvador’s entire population—the highest incarceration rate in the world. Still, because violence has dropped sharply, political figures across Latin America speak about emulating Bukele’s “security model.” But behind the videos of mega-prisons and tweets about plunging homicide rates lies a darker, less sustainable reality. In this WOLA Podcast episode, Adam Isacson speaks with Beatriz Magaloni (personal site / Stanford site), a political scientist at Stanford University and co-author (with Alberto Díaz-Cayeros) of a Foreign Affairs article published September 11, 2025: “Does the Bukele Model Have a Future?” Their conversation reveals what Magaloni calls “a system of state terror and resource extraction,” and explores why El Salvador’s experiment in mass incarceration may ultimately collapse under its own weight. In fieldwork conducted since last year, Dr. Magaloni interviewed the families of hundreds of victims of the security crackdown, many aided by MOVIR, the Movement of Victims of the Regime, which WOLA is honoring with its 2025 Human Rights Award. “Our crime is to be poor,” families told her. Police and soldiers face monthly arrest quotas, Magaloni explains. Civilians can denounce neighbors by calling a hotline—and are sometimes paid $300 bounties. Poor Salvadorans, many in communities with little or no gang presence, end up seized and jailed in prisons like Izalco and Mariona, where conditions amount to systematic torture. This, Magaloni says, has turned the carceral system into “a machine that milks the poor.” Bukele’s ongoing emergency decrees, renewed 42 times, now serve dual purposes: silencing critics and funding repression. Despite its popularity, Bukele’s “model” rests on brittle foundations. Poverty remains over 30 percent and is not declining. The economy depends on remittances from abroad, not job creation. Corruption persists, while transparency laws and data access have been erased. Bukele’s control of the media, polished propaganda videos, and rapid-fire social-media presence drown out criticism. Civil society’s challenge, Magaloni argues, is to build equally powerful counter-narratives that humanize victims and expose hidden abuses. Drawing on decades of field research in Mexico and Brazil, Magaloni concedes that effective citizen security sometimes does require force, but points to past experiments that achieved short-term safety without repression, human rights abuse, or democratic dismantlement. These include efforts like community-based policing in Medellín or Rio de Janeiro’s early UPPs, which showed progress before political will and funding eroded. Bukele “could have stopped six months in, admitted mistakes, freed the innocent—and he’d have deserved credit,” Magaloni says. “Instead, he institutionalized terror.”  

Since late August, the Trump administration has sent a flotilla of U.S. warships to the southern Caribbean, in the largest naval display in the region in decades. On September 2, a U.S. drone strike sank a small boat near the Venezuelan coast, killing as many as eleven civilians. Administration officials allege the vessel carried cocaine, but have presented no evidence. In this WOLA Podcast episode, Adam Isacson speaks with Laura Dib, Director for Venezuela, and John Walsh, Director for Drug Policy and the Andes, about the shockwaves from this escalation, both region-wide and especially in Venezuela. An Extreme New Military Stance: Seven warships and up to 7,000 personnel now patrol Caribbean waters near Venezuela. A lethal strike on September 2 marks, as Walsh calls it, “a radical departure” from decades of U.S. maritime drug-interdiction practice. Serious Legal and Human-Rights Implications: U.S. law authorizes interdiction of illegal drugs, not summary execution. “There’s a word in English for an act like this,” Walsh warns. “That word is murder.” International law allows the use of force only in self-defense or with the approval of the UN Security Council—neither applies. U.S. law and policy, too, prohibit the use of lethal force on civilians without a self-defense justification. That is so even if those civilians are labeled “terrorists,” if there is no link to the September 11, 2001 attacks, and no explicit congressional authorization for the use of force. The Venezuela Context: After fraudulent July 2024 elections, Nicolás Maduro governs without legitimacy, with widespread persecution and what Dib calls “reasons to believe that crimes against humanity have been committed.” There is also a clear connection between large-scale corruption and the complex humanitarian emergency in which the country is immersed. Criminal economies flourish in a regime of state-embedded drug trafficking, but Venezuela is not the busiest route for U.S.-bound cocaine. The Reality of the U.S. Drug Overdose Crisis: The U.S. overdose emergency is driven by fentanyl and other opioids “that come almost entirely through Mexico,” Walsh notes, “with zero to do with anything in the Caribbean.” At least as of 2022, 80 percent of cocaine also transits the Pacific route via Central America and Mexico, not the Caribbean. U.S. Political Calculations: Trump administration officials boast of the strike and hint at more. They frame Venezuela as a “narco-terror” threat while simultaneously maintaining oil licenses, cooperating on deportations, and even meeting with Maduro earlier this year. Walsh warns the move feeds a domestic narrative of an “invasion” of migrants and organized crime groups to justify domestic use of emergency powers. Regional and Global Fallout: Some Latin American governments show “striking silence,” Dib observes, torn between defending sovereignty and condemning Maduro’s abuses. The OAS and UN have issued only mild calls for de-escalation, reflecting both U.S. pressure and Venezuela’s authoritarian reality. Both guests outline alternatives: Cut the Financial Lifelines: Dib calls for re-establishing the Justice Department’s Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative to seize billions in stolen Venezuelan assets. The U.S. government should coordinate more closely with Europe and Latin America to track the proceeds of corruption and undermine the economic pillar of support for authoritarian governments with connections to illicit economies. Support Civil Society and Rule of Law: It is urgent to restore programming previously administered by USAID that sustains independent journalism and human-rights groups now operating under threat, and to use universal-jurisdiction statutes to prosecute Venezuelan officials responsible for torture or other grave abuses. Address U.S. Drug Demand at Home: Expand and strengthen harm-reduction and treatment—naloxone distribution, methadone access—that have begun to lower overdose deaths. Reject the false promise of militarized interdiction that decades of evidence show to be ineffective and costly. As Isacson sums up, “From overdose prevention to supporting civil society in Venezuela to curbing illicit financial flows…the administration is taking key tools out of its toolbox” while swinging a military sledgehammer. Other resources from WOLA: September 8 - Q&A: Tension between Venezuela and the United States: between truth and theater September 3 - Lethal U.S. military strike on alleged drug traffickers sets a dangerous precedent in the “war on drugs” August 14 - One year since the presidential election of July 28, 2024: the Venezuelan crisis August 13 - Five Reasons Why Trump’s Anti-Cartel Military Plan Will Fail

Since January, the United States’ migrant detention and deportation system, which was already troubled, has become increasingly opaque. Access to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities is restricted, internal oversight agencies have been hollowed out, and credible information about conditions inside is scarce. Yet reports that have emerged, some from those who have recently been deported, tell a troubling story echoing the darkest moments of recent U.S. immigration history. In late July and early August, researchers from WOLA and the Women’s Refugee Commission (WRC) set out to pierce this “black box” by visiting cities in Honduras, Guatemala, and Mexico that are key deportation hubs. There, they interviewed deported migrants, service providers, advocates, experts, and government officials to learn what they are hearing about conditions in U.S. detention. The findings are disturbing. They point to a resurgence of family separations, cruel treatment, miserable, unhealthy conditions, and deportation processes that violate migrants’ rights and dignity. With transparency mechanisms dismantled, these abuses are happening out of public view. In this episode, host Adam Isacson talks with two colleagues from WRC with whom he traveled: Zain Lakhani, WRC’s director of Migrant Rights and Justice. Diana Flórez, a consultant to WRC, an attorney and expert on gender, transitional justice, development, and peacebuilding. During their travels, Isacson, Lakhani, and Flórez shared photos and initial findings in four “dispatches” published to our organizations’ websites, from Honduras, Guatemala, Tapachula, and Ciudad Juárez. We heard consistent accounts of: Family separations: A larger number than expected of parents deported without U.S. citizen children, often without being given the choice of being removed with them. The crisis is approaching the scale of the “zero tolerance” family separations that shocked the nation in 2018. Inhumane conditions: Overcrowded cells, lack of medical care, and verbal and physical abuse by guards. Threats to the health of pregnant and lactating women and their children: Insufficient and poor-quality food, difficulty in obtaining medical attention, and even being forced to sleep on floors. (The podcast refers to a July 30 report on abuse in detention, especially of pregnant women and children, by the office of Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Georgia).) Targeting of vulnerable populations: Harassment of LGBTQ+ individuals, especially trans individuals who are now detained with the gender to which they were assigned at birth. As Lakhani notes, “Historically… we were able to enter detention centers and visit them and speak with migrants,” but “now we’re seeing the deliberate creation of a black box.” We hope that the WOLA–WRC delegation’s findings will guide future, more intensive on-the-ground research enabling advocates to refer egregious abuses requiring legal action, build a rigorous archive of known cases, and inform public opinion and policymakers.  

A Special Pride Month Episode This special Pride Month episode brings together the voices of six LGBTIQ+ activists from across Latin America—Mexico, Honduras, Colombia, Venezuela, and El Salvador—who share their experiences as leaders in the fight for equality and justice. Through their stories, we explore what Pride means in contexts of resistance, the state of LGBTIQ+ rights across the region, and the ongoing work to build more inclusive societies.  

For the second year in a row, what had been an uneventful, consensus-driven United Nations meeting on drug policy saw unexpected drama and signs of real change. At the 68th session of the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) in Vienna in March 2025, governments approved the formation of an independent expert commission to recommend changes to the architecture of global drug policy, which has changed little since the early 1960s. Colombia again played a catalytic role, as it did in 2024. But this time, the United States—under the new Trump administration—tried to block nearly everything, isolating itself diplomatically in the process. In this episode of the WOLA Podcast, Adam Isacson speaks with three experts who were in Vienna: Ann Fordham, Executive Director of the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), a network of 195 organizations working to reform global drug policy. Isabel Pereira, Senior Coordinator for drug policy at DeJusticia, a Bogotá-based think tank and advocacy group. John Walsh, WOLA’s Director for Drug Policy, who has tracked the UN’s drug control system since the 1980s. The conversation traces the slow evolution of the UN drug control system—from decades of punitive consensus to today’s shifting coalitions, unprecedented votes, and long-overdue reviews. Much of the episode centers on a breakthrough: a new resolution establishing an “independent external review” of the UN’s own drug control institutions. For years, countries like Colombia have called for an honest assessment of the system’s failings. Now, thanks to a resolution spearheaded by Colombia and passed over U.S. opposition, that review is happening. The details still matter: how independent the expert panel will truly be, who funds it, and whether the review can influence the hard architecture of the drug control treaties. “Vienna was very much a space where delegates would just pat each other on the back on how well we’re doing the war on drugs,” Pereira said. “The spirit of Vienna created a sort of lockdown situation on debate, true debate,” added Walsh. “Civil society enlivened the Vienna atmosphere” in recent years, he noted, “with new debates, new arguments.” Now, this international space has become more dynamic. The guests also discuss coca leaf: its decades-old listing as a Schedule I narcotic, Bolivia’s and Colombia’s ongoing push for a scientific review, and the possibility of a pivotal vote in 2026. They stress how traditional knowledge—especially from Indigenous communities—must be recognized as legitimate scientific input during that review. Underlying it all is a major diplomatic shift. Colombia is using the UN system to demand drug policy grounded in health, human rights, and development—not militarized prohibition. But with Petro’s term ending in 2026, it’s unclear who will pick up the baton. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is signaling a return to zero-tolerance drug war policies—and burning bridges with potential allies in the process. “They behaved so terribly. I mean, they broke with all diplomatic niceties,” said Fordham. “The U.S. just went for it in their opening statement… It was frankly an embarrassing, but also pretty shocking statement.” Despite the uncertainty, all three guests agree: civil society is no longer on the sidelines. NGOs and experts are shaping debates, challenging rigid thinking in Vienna, and holding governments to account.

**This podcast is in Spanish. Stay tuned for an English summary! Este Mes de la Mujer, en WOLA lanzamos una serie especial de nuestro podcast para amplificar voces feministas que luchan por los derechos humanos en América Latina. En nuestro último episodio, conversamos con Ruth López, directora del programa de anticorrupción en Cristosal, sobre su trabajo en la lucha contra la corrupción y el autoritarismo en El Salvador. Nuestra invitada Ruth López es abogada, defensora de los derechos humanos y directora del programa de anticorrupción de Cristosal, una organización que trabaja en la promoción de derechos humanos, estado de derecho y la lucha contra la corrupción en El Salvador. Ruth ha sido reconocida por su valentía y liderazgo en la defensa de los derechos humanos en un contexto difícil, y fue incluida en la lista de las 100 mujeres más influyentes de 2024 de la BBC. Su trabajo se centra en la lucha por la justicia, la transparencia y el respeto de los derechos humanos en El Salvador, donde el autoritarismo y la corrupción están afectando el ejercicio de derechos fundamentales.

On March 15, 2025 President Donald Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 for only the fourth time in U.S. history. The target, this time, is citizens of Venezuela. His administration sent hundreds out of the country on the merest suspicion of ties to a criminal organization, the Tren de Aragua. In this explainer episode recorded on March 21, with help from WOLA’s Venezuela Director Laura Dib and Central America Director Ana María Méndez Dardón, Defense Oversight Director Adam Isacson walks through what has happened over the past six dark days in U.S. history. The Alien Enemies Act did not use any standard of due process, and many of those sent out of the country, it is now very apparent, were documented in the United States and were not guilty of anything. All it took was for U.S. agents to decide that they did not like the way these young men looked. The Trump administration ignored a clear order from a federal judge to turn the planes around, and is now resisting that judge’s demands for information. The result is one of the most severe constitutional crises in U.S. history, which is unresolved as of March 21st. Rather than simply deport them, the planes took 238 citizens of Venezuela straight to El Salvador, where authoritarian leader Nayib Bukele took them straight to a notorious mega-prison where those inside are cut off from the outside world and never seem to emerge. This alarming story is far from over, but this episode lays out some of the most pertinent facts and context in half an hour.

This Women's Month, WOLA launched a special podcast series to amplify feminist voices fighting for human rights in Latin America. Our second episode was our first-ever Spanish-language episode. Our president, Carolina Jiménez Sandoval, spoke with Quimy de León (Guatemala) and Sofía López Mera (Colombia), two feminist communicators and human rights defenders. We explored the crucial role of communication in human rights advocacy and how to approach it from a feminist perspective. We also discussed the additional challenges women in this field face, from gender-based violence to censorship. This episode is an English recap of that conversation.  Our Guests Sofía López Mera is a journalist, lawyer, and human rights defender in Colombia. She works at the Corporación Justicia y Dignidad and is a member of the National Movement of Mothers and Women for Peace. Her work focuses on supporting grassroots communities affected by armed conflict, using popular communication as a key tool for organizing, mobilizing, and raising awareness about human rights. As a mother, she deeply understands the challenges women face in human rights advocacy and therefore embraces a feminist approach in her work. Quimy de León is a journalist, doctor, and historian from Guatemala with over 20 years of experience. She is the founder and director of Prensa Comunitaria, an alternative media outlet covering environmental issues, human rights, and the impact of extractivism on Indigenous communities in Guatemala. She also founded La Ruda, a feminist digital magazine focused on sexual and reproductive rights. In 2024, she was awarded the Press Freedom Prize by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) for her bravery and commitment to community journalism in Guatemala.

**This podcast is in Spanish. Stay tuned for an English summary! Este Mes de la Mujer, en WOLA lanzamos una serie especial de nuestro podcast para amplificar voces feministas que luchan por los derechos humanos en América Latina. En nuestro segundo episodio, hablamos sobre comunicación, defensa de derechos humanos y feminismo. En nuestro primer episodio en español, nuestra presidenta, Carolina Jiménez Sandoval, conversó con Quimy de León (Guatemala) y Sofía López Mera (Colombia), dos comunicadoras feministas y defensoras de derechos humanos. Hablamos sobre el papel fundamental de la comunicación en la defensa de los derechos humanos y cómo hacerlo desde un enfoque feminista. También discutimos los desafíos adicionales que enfrentan las mujeres que se dedican a este trabajo, desde la violencia de género hasta la censura. 🎧 Escucha el episodio y únete a la conversación. Nuestras invitadas: 🔹 Sofía López Mera es periodista, abogada y defensora de derechos humanos en Colombia. Trabaja en la Corporación Justicia y Dignidad y es miembro del Movimiento Nacional de Madres y Mujeres por la Paz. Su labor se centra en acompañar a comunidades de base afectadas por la violencia del conflicto armado, utilizando la comunicación popular como una herramienta clave para organizar, movilizar y generar conciencia sobre los derechos de las personas. Como madre, entiende profundamente los desafíos que enfrentan las mujeres en la defensa de derechos y, por eso, apuesta por un enfoque feminista en su trabajo. 🔹 Quimy de León es periodista, médica e historiadora guatemalteca con más de 20 años de experiencia. Es fundadora y directora de la Prensa Comunitaria, un medio alternativo que cubre temas ambientales, derechos humanos y el impacto del extractivismo en comunidades indígenas en Guatemala. También fundó La Ruda, una revista digital feminista centrada en los derechos sexuales y reproductivos. En 2024, fue reconocida con el Premio a la Libertad de Prensa del Comité para la Protección de los Periodistas (CPJ) por su valentía y compromiso con el periodismo comunitario en Guatemala.