These questions came from the Latin Times but, at the time of this release, have yet to appear with the publication. I wrote these comments from San Pedro Sula, Honduras.
1. What is your initial take on the agreement between President Xiomara Castro and the Donald Trump administration?
This has been major news here in Honduras. People recognize the utmost importance of positive relations with the United States, be that for trade, remittances, or national security. The specter of tens of thousands of Hondurans being deported looms large, as does the pulling out of military resources from the Palmerola base.
Anuncio que he llegado a un acuerdo con la nueva administración de los Estados Unidos para que el Tratado de Extradición continúe con las salvaguardas necesarias para el Estado de Honduras, garantizando su aplicación objetiva. En consecuencia he asegurado el respeto a la…
— Xiomara Castro de Zelaya (@XiomaraCastroZ) February 18, 2025
There is a key caveat that few have noticed, although one Honduran congresswoman has called it a trick. The agreement is only temporary, in place for another six months. It comes amid the domestic campaign season, specifically the party primaries for the general elections later this year. Now is not the time for the incumbent Libre party to pick a fight with President Trump, even if Libre is diametrically opposed to him ideologically.
📢 ¡Buenas noticias… pero con truco! La presidenta anuncia que el gobierno retrocede en la denuncia del tratado de extradición ✋⚖️, pero no menciona que es temporal
— Fátima Mena Baide (@FatimaMenaHN) February 18, 2025
🚨 ¿Seguridad real o solo estrategia? Manténgase alerta#HondurasSegura #JusticiaParaTodos #SinImpunidad pic.twitter.com/y4O6TpFK66
2. What are Castro and Honduras getting from the agreement? Or is it just a case, as with other countries in the region, of folding upon tariff threats?
Just fewer dramas, more stability through to the end of the electoral season. President Castro and her husband, Manuel Zelaya, want Rixi Moncada to succeed her as president. Castro is, for now, avoiding isolation from a developing new trade bloc—one that excludes China—that President Donald Trump is swiftly building in the Americas.
If she could do away with the treaty, Castro would, since she likely has friends who fear such extradition. It is not a theoretical concern here, given the prominence of narcotrafficking. One need only look to see what happened to past President Juan Orlando Hernández, who is incarcerated in West Virginia.
3. Even though Secretary of State Marco Rubio did not visit Honduras, is there a correlation between the Central America trip and her decision?
Yes and no. Secretary of State Rubio traveled to where he saw the most promise for a positive reception and results. That was clear, and Honduras has of late been more aligned with the Chinese Communist Party. However, even if Rubio had not taken the trip, I suspect a similar outcome could have been achieved. The trip simply underlined the importance of the Western Hemisphere in the Trump administration’s plans.
4. How would you evaluate Rubio’s visit to the region?
It was mixed and, at times, confusing. While he achieved concessions for deportations and rule-of-law coordination, he seemed rushed and sent odd signals with his rhetoric. In Guatemala, for example, locals were left scratching their heads. They were unsure who Rubio was targeting when he raised concerns about coups and democratic stability.
