Venezuela and Mexico: A Comparative Analysis of Kamala Harris and Donald Trump's Proposals on Latin America

An examination of political visions regarding migration and bilateral relations in the U.S. electoral context

As the presidential elections in the United States approach, the focus on Latin America has become a relevant, albeit not a top priority, topic in the campaigns of Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. Both candidates face significant challenges related to migration, particularly from countries like Venezuela and Mexico, which have seen an increase in the flow of migrants toward the U.S. border. This article examines the similarities and differences in their proposals, as well as the implications these may have for the region.

Approaches to Migration

Kamala Harris has adopted a more nuanced approach to migration. Her strategy is based on addressing the root causes of forced displacement by promoting investments in Central America totaling $5 billion to foster economic and social development. Additionally, she has expressed her intention to work on a bipartisan law that reinforces border security and improves the asylum process, although her approach is less drastic than that of her opponent. Harris rejects mass deportations and seeks a more gradual and humanitarian solution to the migration crisis.

In contrast, Donald Trump has centered his campaign on a hardline stance against immigration. He promises to implement "the largest deportation effort in U.S. history" and close the border to undocumented migrants. Trump links the arrival of migrants to issues such as crime and rising living costs, using these arguments to mobilize his electoral base. His approach is radically different from Harris's, prioritizing severe measures that could have significant humanitarian consequences.

Relations with Mexico

The relationship with Mexico is crucial for both candidates. Trump has pledged to renegotiate trade agreements he deems unfavorable to the United States and has threatened high tariffs on Mexican products. His proposal includes bombing drug cartels on Mexican soil, reflecting a militaristic approach to the drug problem.

Harris, on the other hand, emphasizes collaboration with Mexico on issues such as arms and drug trafficking. As California's Attorney General, she previously worked with Mexican authorities to address these problems. If Harris wins, it would be notable for both neighboring countries to be led by women, potentially opening new avenues for bilateral cooperation.

Regional Challenges

Both candidates must confront the political crisis in Venezuela and Nicolás Maduro's new mandate. Trump has threatened military intervention and maintained severe sanctions against the Venezuelan regime; however, his rhetoric has been less prominent in this campaign cycle. Harris also opposes Maduro and could impose new sanctions if he remains in power, although this might increase migratory pressure toward the United States.

The proposals of Kamala Harris and Donald Trump regarding Latin America reflect opposing approaches to migration and bilateral relations. While Harris seeks more humanitarian and collaborative solutions, Trump adopts a more aggressive and restrictive stance. The election of the next president will not only impact migrants seeking refuge in the United States but also diplomatic relations with key countries like Mexico and Venezuela. How each candidate plans to address these challenges will have significant repercussions not only for Latin America but also for U.S. domestic politics.