El Salvador’s militarised intervention in Haiti exposes transnational gang dynamics, historical colonial legacies, and the limits of state-led security in the Caribbean diaspora
Original framing: “Bukele says military operation launched to rescue Salvadorans held by gangs in Haiti - AP News” — AP News (via Google News)
The current intervention echoes historical patterns of foreign military involvement in Haiti, including the 19th-century U.S. occupation (1915–1934), which destabilised Haitian society and reinforced elite control, and the 2004 UN-backed coup that removed President Jean-Bertrand Aristide—a move widely criticised for undermining Haitian sovereignty. El Salvador’s own history of militarisation, including the 1980s civil war and the subsequent rise of gangs like MS-13 and Barrio 18, demonstrates how state violence often begets further violence rather than resolving it. Additionally, the Salvadoran diaspora in Haiti, many of whom fled during the 1980s civil war, now face a similar dynamic where state intervention is framed as protection but risks repeating historical cycles of instability. The framing of this operation as a 'rescue' ignores these historical precedents, which suggest that military interventions rarely address root causes and often exacerbate conflict.
The militarised 'rescue' narrative framing El Salvador’s intervention in Haiti obscures a systemic failure to address the transnational and structural roots of gang violence.
Historical patterns—from Haiti’s repeated foreign interventions to El Salvador’s own civil war and gang proliferation—demonstrate that militarisation rarely resolves conflict but instead perpetuates cycles of violence and instability. The framing also ignores the cross-cultural and indigenous frameworks for security, which prioritise community, restorative justice, and spiritual balance over state-enforced solutions. Scientific research further reveals that gangs are embedded in global economic systems, making them resilient to military crackdowns, while marginalised voices—such as those of Haitian civilians and Salvadoran diaspora members—highlight the human cost of such interventions. A trickster reading exposes the absurdity of this narrative, revealing how power dynamics and historical trauma are being replayed under the guise of humanitarianism. To break this cycle, solutions must shift from militarisation to regional dialogue, community-based security, economic inclusion, and international accountability—lessons drawn from historical precedents like Colombia’s peace accords and Rwanda’s *Gacaca* courts. The path forward requires acknowledging the interconnectedness of these nations’ struggles and centering the voices and knowledge of those most affected.