U.S. should not undermine progress it helped propel in Central America | Opinion

Central America is at a crossroads — as is the United States when it comes to our own hemisphere. We’ve seen this movie before and should heed its lessons. Two decades ago, it was Colombia. Today, it is Venezuela. Tomorrow, the list could grow. Most important, outcomes are not preordained.

During 15 years of sustained partnership, Colombia transitioned from a violence-ridden subsidiary of drug cartels to an important regional security partner and market for American goods and services.

With the growing crisis at the border, some have called for the suspension of aid to Central America, saying it’s not working. But that’s a false narrative: American aid has improved the very conditions that drive migration in the Northern Triangle. Violence and lack of economic opportunity are certainly far from solved, but to pull back now would make the migration crisis worse and hurt American interests.

Start with lessons learned from Plan Colombia, an initiative supported by Republican and Democratic administrations. At its core was Colombian commitment. But it also took active American diplomacy combined with sustained assistance. The United States invested $10 billion in security and economic assistance over a decade to combat illegal narcotics and promote economic growth. We trained farmers to grow crops and bring their goods to market and delivered American private-sector partners. Violence and poverty receded and today American exports to Colombia have quadrupled.

Following the last massive migration in 2014, when 68,000 unaccompanied children arrived at our border, America launched the Alliance for Prosperity, committing an initial $750 million and the Northern Triangle countries brought more than seven times that amount — $5.4 billion of their own resources.

It was working. By the end of 2017, migration hit the lowest levels since 1971.

Once again, we aggressively pursued our dual agenda of tough diplomatic engagement and strategic investments. We insisted on countrywide reforms to tackle corruption, while simultaneously reforming tax systems. An international anti-corruption commission in Guatemala, enabled because of U.S. pressure, led to the resignation and arrest of President Molina in 2015. We worked with local police — galvanizing State Department, FBI and DEA resources — even leading to FBI operations here at home to arrest MS-13 thugs.

We also invested in effective economic development, as in Plan Colombia, focusing on youth populations, creating alternatives to gangs or migrating north. Partnering with World Vision and Catholic Relief Services, we created youth centers as safe spaces and provided vocational training. Over two years, homicide rates declined by 42 percent in El Salvador, 13 percent in Guatemala and 23 percent in Honduras, up to 78 percent in the roughest neighborhoods where we intervened.

Because food insecurity also drives migration, we trained farmers and leveraged private investment. In one Guatemalan program, we reached 230,000 children under the age of 5 with nutritional support.

American engagement saved lives and kept people at home.

But as headlines faded and political gridlock in Washington intensified, we stepped back. U.S. assistance to the Northern Triangle declined by nearly 20 percent, and we’re still missing three of four key regional ambassadors.

The situation on the ground festers. Half the population in Guatemala and Honduras live in poverty. In the Northern Triangle, one-third of youth are unemployed. The region still experiences some of the world’s highest murder rates. For every 10 murders in the Northern Triangle, six children flee. In Guatemala, the government tried to expel the international anti-corruption commission, which was investigating the current president.

When America pulls back, others step in. Russia’s footprint is growing in the region, particularly in its connections with the local military and police. Just last year, China brought its Belt and Road Initiative to Latin America. The United States is the clear alternative with the State Department’s stability efforts grounded in the rule of law, development finance resources through the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation, partnerships with the Inter-American Development Bank and economic development programs through USAID — but only if we unleash our efforts to their full potential and don’t take our foot off the gas when it comes to accountability.

David Urban, a former Trump campaign strategist, says we should “double down on aid” to the Northern Triangle and “try to keep people from wanting to leave in the first place.” Referencing Plan Colombia, he argues, “We can do this. We know how to do it.”

He’s right. It’s time to strike a new grand bargain that will leave us with more-stable neighbors. It’s an American playbook that works. The Northern Triangle governments can and must do a lot more to stamp out corruption, address the rule of law, and promote stability. There’s no substitute for country leadership. But it’s at our peril that we retreat from the playbook proven to address the root causes that drive people from their homes.

Colombia’s challenges in the 1990s looked much bleaker than today in the Northern Triangle. Yet we proved that America could help change our own hemisphere. The question today is not can we do it, but will we?

Liz Schrayer is the president and CEO of the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition.