SACHA PFEIFFER, HOST:
We're starting today's show with a surprise twist in the Trump administration's mass deportation effort. A large-scale prisoner swap happened Friday. It was coordinated among the U.S., El Salvador and Venezuela. It moved the 250 Venezuelans who had been deported from the U.S. to a massive prison in El Salvador back to Venezuela. In exchange, Venezuela released 10 U.S. nationals it had imprisoned. That raises important questions. What incentives do countries have to take migrants deported from the United States, and how effective has this tactic been for the U.S.?
Deporting migrants to third countries has become a key Trump administration strategy. Earlier this week, the U.S. sent several migrants to the Southern African nation of Eswatini, formerly known as Swaziland. In recent months, it sent deportees to South Sudan, and it's considering adding Rwanda to the list. A former State Department lawyer named Chris Campanovo has insights into this. Chris, thanks for coming on the show.
CHRIS CAMPONOVO: Sure. Happy to be here, Sacha.
PFEIFFER: Part of your government work used to involve finding countries willing to take Guantanamo prisoners rounded up after 9/11 and later cleared for release, so you know what it takes to broker these kind of complex deals. Tell us how you see yesterday's prisoner swap announcement connecting to President Trump's deportation agenda.
CAMPONOVO: I think what we've seen is a policy which is based primarily in scaring migrants, I think. I think we've seen a policy which is based in deterrence primarily, to essentially show people that you come to America, you're probably going to wind up back where you are fleeing or some third country which you've probably never heard of or could find on a map. This is a pretty drastic departure from several decades of U.S. policy, which is to - which has been only to return people once we've had - received diplomatic assurances that people would not be sent home where they could face persecution or torture or to third countries where they'd be subject to potential torture, persecution, et cetera.
PFEIFFER: In many of these cases, the U.S. government is sending deportees to places where they have no connection. Do you see common themes in the type of countries the Trump administration is sending many of these migrants to? - because these are notably not European nations, but much less stable African and Central American countries?
CAMPONOVO: Sure. I mean, I think what you see is, these are countries that aren't generally on the radar. And I think what a lot of these countries are doing or we'll see them wanting to do is seek favor with the United States and with the president. They're looking for that photo op, potentially, an invitation to the Oval Office, which gives them more standing back home, enables them to show, hey, look, I'm friends with the president of the United States. So whatever the favor is they're attempting to curry, that's how I think some of these countries are trying to do it, is through accepting these deportees.
PFEIFFER: Tell us more about these favors or motivations because the president of El Salvador has said that the U.S. gave his country $6 million to take those deported Venezuelans off the U.S.'s hands. How much is this simply about money, do you think?
CAMPONOVO: Well, I think part of it certainly is about money. We've heard about El Salvador. We don't know what the deals looked like in some of these other countries. But I think that's certainly going to be part of it. Again, I think this is a departure from previous practice, which was essentially to seek assurance on the basis of a relationship, on the basis of comedy (ph) with some of these countries.
PFEIFFER: When you were working for the State Department and negotiating deals to take back refugees or migrants who couldn't go back to their own countries so you had to find another country, did you ever pay those countries to take them?
CAMPONOVO: We did not. That was not part of our - part of the negotiations.
PFEIFFER: There was a released Guantanamo detainee who ended up being sent to Belize. And as I recall, I think the U.S. helped pay for him to have a house and a car and a phone. Were there sometimes cases where you may not give the country cash, but you would help them support that person set up a life?
CAMPONOVO: Right, exactly. That was the case. There were times when we could provide support. I think those things are important, right? I mean, we've done that for decades with refugee resettlement in the United States is that...
PFEIFFER: You'll pay for those things for them.
CAMPONOVO: We would pay for these things - right? - because the last thing you want is for somebody to come and have no support system, no structure, they don't speak the language. Those people tend to get into trouble, and so, you know, you do that. But strictly a cash transaction - no, that was not something that was part of how we tried to negotiate these returns.
PFEIFFER: In Friday's prisoner swap of the Venezuelan deportees, are we now seeing an emerging strategy of deportees as pawns or trading material?
CAMPONOVO: Well, I think so, and that's a little scary, right? I mean, we've got - we don't really know the individual situations of these Venezuelans. I mean, they fled Venezuela for a reason. Some were economic migrants, but some may also be political migrants - right? - who are fleeing persecution. And so now we're in a situation where, OK, well, if you, El Salvador, will take these Venezuelans and we can get American hostages back, we're not really worried about whether you give them back so long as we can achieve our objectives. And that's a little worrying because what it does is it throws by the wayside, you know, international obligations of the United States, which are not to return people where they have a credible fear of being persecuted.
PFEIFFER: The ACLU says these third-country deportations are illegal and has sued to stop them. In your view, are they illegal?
CAMPONOVO: Yes, I would say that they are. They violate international obligations of the United States, which - we've made the Refugee Convention, as well as the Convention against Torture. So - because there is a credible threat that people who are returned to their countries of origin could be subjected to persecution for reasons that are outlawed under the Refugee Convention, as well as the Convention against Torture.
PFEIFFER: The U.S. is not the only country to ship migrants to unstable, faraway places. Britain controversially tried to do it in Rwanda. Australia has been criticized for sending asylum seekers to Pacific Island Nations. Is what the U.S. doing - does it seem different to you for any reason?
CAMPONOVO: I think it's different. You know, in Britain, there were - there was a lot of - there was a - quite a bit of an uproar over the Rwanda plan in Australia. But it was part of a policy. I think in Britain, there were a certain amount of protections that were tried to be put in place. Now I think it just feels like it's random. It feels like we're just going to send him anywhere we possibly can. It feels like the only policy is just one of, let's just scare people without any sense of morality or sense of sense of law.
PFEIFFER: Chris Campanovo is a former State Department lawyer. Chris, thanks for talking with us about this.
CAMPONOVO: Thanks, Sacha. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
