A Conversation With President Bernardo Arévalo of Guatemala

President Bernardo Arévalo discusses anti-corruption in Guatemala, the state of democracy in the region, migration, and the country's foreign policy under his new administration.

This meeting is part of the Diamonstein-Spielvogel Meeting Series on Democracy.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Hi, everyone. Welcome to today’s Council on Foreign Relations meeting with President Bernardo Arévalo of Guatemala. An honor to have you here. Thank you for being here.

Arévalo: It’s a honor. And thank you for having me here.

CARUSO-CABRERA: I’m Michelle Caruso-Cabrera, chief executive officer of MCC Productions and a CNBC contributor. And I will be presiding over today’s discussion. We are joined both by CFR members here in person and also virtually. This meeting is on the record. At 3:30 I’m going to open it up to audience questions, but in the meantime let’s get started.

So Guatemala did not have an orderly transition to power when you were elected and inaugurated earlier this year. The opposition tried very hard to prevent you from becoming president. President Biden stepped in, the U.S. Congress stepped in, the OAS stepped in and called what was happening a coup d’etat. Finally, after a delayed inauguration where people were very nervous, you did become president of Guatemala. Congratulations. How secure do you feel about your hold on the position and democracy and ruling under such a condition?

Arévalo: Well, I feel secure because I know that we have the support of the people of Guatemala. But I am very aware of the fact that the corrupt minority that attempted to derail the elections has not—is still occupying spaces of power. They still have control, for example, of the attorney general’s office. They are still actively trying to find ways into which they can attack us. And they have not lost hope that at some point in time they succeed in, you know, bringing us down and trying to have something of a comeback. We are very aware, and so we are very attentive.

But at the end of the day, we believe that we are in the middle of a process that has led us to get control of the executive branch of power, that we are having, as we speak, a process of election of judges for the courts in Guatemala that is having positive results, if not perfect. And that at the end of the day the—both the international and national environment is going to make impossible an attempt to try to derail the process. So I’m not insecure, but I’m aware that people will try to keep trying to bring us down.

CARUSO-CABRERA: What are your priorities as president? And can you achieve them in this situation when you have so much opposition?

Arévalo: Well, I think that our priorities are fundamentally about letting people—giving them evidence that they were right. They were right by hoping that you can have a government that can govern without corruption, that can begin to use public money as it is supposed to be used, and that actually delivers in terms of development for the people. And so our goal is to produce evidence in roads, in schools, in support for small entrepreneurs, on new conditions in which indigenous populations actually can live and thrive. Our is to deliver, to deliver on what institutions are created to do. And in order to do so, we need to manage the space politically and be aware that there’s always going to be this corrupt minority that is going to continue attacking us in the process.

CARUSO-CABRERA: When a lot of Americans think of Guatemala, they think of the thousands and thousands of Guatemalans who have come to the U.S. border, more than 200,000 last year according to the Border Patrol, in terms of encounters. Vice President Kamala Harris has gone to Guatemala to try to attack the root causes of irregular migration from Guatemala and the rest of the—of the region. What are you doing in order to try to reduce the level of irregular migration?

Arévalo: We are working in two fronts. We need to work on the short time, immediate term in order to try to mitigate some of the effects that we have of the fact that the levels of poverty in our country are pushing people out of their villages and making them to look for work in different places. We are doing it in different ways. First of all, we are very strongly working in order to dismantle human trafficking networks that are also causing a lot of misery and pain to these populations as they move—try to move into the United States.

And we are working together, with the United States and with other countries like Canada and we’re discussing it now with countries in Europe, even with Mexico, expanding programs for temporal labor so that we have bigger contingents of people that can go for six months or a year and then come back to Guatemala with the possibility of returning again for another six months or a year to work on different issues. And that’s an important element. And if you handle this in a way that it goes and happens in towns which are identified as the ones that are expelling more people, then they can have an effect.

But that, it’s a short-term solution that it’s only to—going to mitigate a problem that will not cease to exist until you actually, as you say, tackle the root causes. And the root causes is poverty and underdevelopment. It is not until the moment in which we actually begin to bring decent livelihoods and dignified livelihoods to these people that migration is going to cease. People are going away not because they want to come to the United States and break from their families and, you know, uproot themselves from their communities. Particularly, what this is happening is in communities which are very tightly knit.

And nevertheless, they do it because there is—there are no economic alternatives. So our challenge, our task, is to begin to provide paths into development so that these people can have jobs. They can become, you know, small agricultural producers. They can have alternatives. And so many of our development programs are aimed precisely at the poorest regions in the country, where you—when you have the concentration of poverty, concentration of indigenous population, where people are actually really coming out—walking out when they are seventeen, sixteen, because there is no future. And investing in infrastructure for development in those places.

CARUSO-CABRERA: One of the reasons people leave Guatemala, according to the Border Patrol when they interview them, is extortion by gangs and crime. What can be done about that, especially because we’ve seen what, for example, Nayib Bukele is doing in El Salvador, where he’s imprisoned more than 1 percent of the population. He’s been criticized for lack of due process, and, yet, he’s become extremely popular because crime has gone down, and other people in the region seem to see that as a model. What do you think?

ARÉVALO: What you’re saying about people leaving out of fear of violence, et cetera, relates more to El Salvador and Honduras than to Guatemala. In the case of Guatemala it’s fundamentally about poverty. And in our case, the migration has poverty as the fundamental reason at the roots, and our criminal landscape is different than the one that you have in El Salvador and Honduras. Each country has its own criminal, I call it, a landscape. It’s the different types of—the profile of criminal activities that you have. The profile of criminal activity in El Salvador, for example, had gangs as one of the fundamental reasons for crime and murder rates and so on. In Guatemala it is different. They are a factor but not necessarily the biggest factor and, for example, for us it is much more important organized crime and drug trafficking. And so we need to actually design strategies that respond to our own criminal profile and not necessarily begin to, you know, bring solutions that are not—that do not respond to our own problems.

So we are engaging in this. We are working very strongly to tackle narcotrafficking. We have captured in these eight months five times more crooks than the government—previous government did in the last year between capturing cocaine in the ports to uprooting cocaine plantations and marijuana plantations and so on and so forth. We are engaging in a very, very clear policy designed to gain control over the jails because the prison system was completely lost—was in the hands of the criminals. We are claiming it back.

It is taking time but we are entering prison by prison, claiming them back, reorganizing them, restructuring them, and we are working in expanding our police force. We have as a goal to have 12,000 new policemen and women in the streets in our four years so to get the level of police force per capita to the international standards because that’s one of the reasons why you have a prevalence of crime. So we are tackling it from different angles.

CARUSO-CABRERA: We highlighted at the top the disorderly transfer of power that happened in Guatemala. A place where the transfer power has not happened is Venezuela despite overwhelming evidence that Maduro lost that election. What’s your position on what should happen there and what Maduro should do?

ARÉVALO: Well, we have been very clear. We have—we rejected the results announced by the National Electoral Council of Venezuela. We said that they were just not acceptable, that they were not credible. We have stated very clearly that we reject the declaration of Maduro as the winner, and that we demand some sort of recount of the actas, and—excuse me, I always forget; how do you say actas in English?

CARUSO-CABRERA: The proof that came out of the ballot machines which showed the voting, correct?

ARÉVALO: Yes, of the—of the ballot stations. So either a recount by the actas by some sort of international actor that is agreed upon, that is trusted, and that then you can use that and count that; or to have—or to have new elections organized. But in any case we are very clearly rejecting the current process as credible at all and we are not recognizing Maduro as the president. What needs to happen I think that the international community needs to support Venezuelan actors to try to find a way to either recount or go back to the ballots to have a solution.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Is there anything more that can be done regionally with other presidents like you pushing harder or using some kind of leverage?

ARÉVALO: Well, there are different efforts that are going on at the time. The presidents of Brazil and Colombia are engaged in or have been engaged—I don’t know what has happened in the late days—in discussions with both the regime and the opposition in Venezuela in order to try to find a possible solution and I think that pressure should continue from every side and possible sanctions that should be imposed in order to force nondemocratic actors to actually abide by the law.

CARUSO-CABRERA: You’re headed to the inauguration next week in Mexico—

ARÉVALO: Yes.

CARUSO-CABRERA: —for the new president where there’s also been criticism what’s been happening with the new election of the legislature before Claudia Sheinbaum actually takes over—the election of judges, which people feel will be very, very politicized, and also perhaps the undoing of independent agencies which would then be a threat to Mexico’s participation in the USMCA. Are you going to speak with AMLO or Claudia Sheinbaum about these things, or raise them? Or what do you think about that situation as we question the state of democracy in Latin America?

ARÉVALO: Well, no, it’s not in my plan to bring the issue up. I know that there is a lot of debate. We have our own debate in terms of what should happen and how should judges be elected. I know that there are differences around the world. There are countries in which judges are elected. I think that some judges in the United States are actually elected.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Right here in New York City. Yeah. (Laughs.)

ARÉVALO: So I know that’s one mechanism. We have judges elected by Congress. I don’t know if that is the best way as well.

Possibly—for example, I’m currently thinking of the possibility of having judges selected just by a meritocratic process, not elected politically. But I think that that is a question that should be answered by every country according to its own mechanisms and traditions, and what works in one place not necessarily works in the other.

CARUSO-CABRERA: You took a stand and said you were going to stand by Taiwan. A lot of countries in Latin America are being forced by China to make a choice and you made yours. Tell me about that experience. I understand you suffered economic coercion from China as a result. Why did you make that choice and what do you hope will come as a result?

ARÉVALO: Well, we have been—we made a decision that we’re going to sustain our diplomatic relations with Taiwan. And we made it very clear from the very beginning that that was going to be the situation because we knew that, you know, this idea that we were going to immediately open relationships with the PRC and sometimes—well, we know that it was used in the context of the election in order to attack us. You know, we were being accused of communism.

So we made it very clear and we have kept our word. We told them as well that we believe that what we need to do is actually get relations between Guatemala and Taiwan to a strategic level, one in which we see more investment and trade between our countries and not just exclusively cooperation, and we are very glad that we are—you know, have very good conversations with Taiwan on exploring possibilities.

We were discussing with you the fact that we—for example, we are discussing both with Taiwan and with the United States the possibility that Guatemala gains access to CHIPS Act fund considering the fact that we have an open and privileged relationship with the United States, we have open access to this market, and we have a privileged relationship with Taiwan.

So why not triangulate this relationship and explore the possibility of making high-tech investments in Guatemala with a view to export to the United States market?

And so that’s the type of conversations that we’re having at this point.

CARUSO-CABRERA: So just so I understand, so the same way that we have given subsidies to, say, Intel and other chip companies are you hoping that there will be subsidies provided to chip manufacturers to put manufacturing in Guatemala? Or what—play that out.

ARÉVALO: No. No, that’s a very good question. No, we’re not looking for subsidies from the United States. The CHIPS Act has established a fund at the University of Arizona that is supposed to—potential partner countries identify their path into, let’s call it, compliance. What we are is asking the U.S. government to provide us access to those funds so that we can have assistance from the University of Arizona into charting our path into that type of compliance. Then it’s a completely different matter, because we believe that it’s—I mean, if this is going to happen, it’s going to happen because we in the government are going to facilitate the investment, but the investment will be 100 percent private, international and national.

CARUSO-CABRERA: We mentioned earlier that there had been economic—attempts of economic coercion by China. What did they do to you in, the wake of—

ARÉVALO: Well, at some point they—you know, there was the inauguration of the new presidency in Taiwan. And we sent our delegation. And then a couple of days afterwards, they blocked import of some products into China. And that’s what happened. At the time, products like nuts and coffee and cardamom, but so it’s being solved.

CARUSO-CABRERA: It’s being solved? Is it solved or is it being solved, or?

ARÉVALO: It’s being solved.

CARUSO-CABRERA: It’s being solved. (Laughter.) Very diplomatic. You’re fluent in Hebrew.

ARÉVALO: Yes.

CARUSO-CABRERA: You studied in Tel Aviv.

ARÉVALO: Yes—no. In Jerusalem.

CARUSO-CABRERA: In Jerusalem, excuse me. You feel very close to Israel, do I understand that correctly? And—

ARÉVALO: I do.

CARUSO-CABRERA: What would you do right now?

ARÉVALO: I think that what the world needs is a ceasefire, a complete release of the hostages, free access of humanitarian assistance, and the beginning of some real international collective effort to establish a framework that enables the parties to seriously find a way into some sort of workable, functional solution. I think that international actors have not really made the best efforts in the last twenty, thirty years to try to get actors to the table in a way that enables a reasonable solution. I think that the current crisis, the tragedy that we’re seeing, the levels of suffering that we have there now, make it evident that we should try to get back to the table and think of something that is workable, or the cycle of violence and despair in that region is going to continue and grow. And I think that that is a danger, not only for the people living in the region, it is a danger for the world.

CARUSO-CABRERA: When you call for a ceasefire, is that on condition first of the release of any remaining hostages? Or—

ARÉVALO: Yeah. Yeah.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Do you still believe in a two-state solution?

ARÉVALO: I do believe in the two-state—I don’t—I don’t see any other solution. I believe in a two-state solution. And I think that’s what we, as an international community, should be striving for. The partition plan of 1947 is still valid. It needs to be adjusted, but the principles are the correct ones. And we need to try to abide by those principles and find the solutions of our time.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Before you were president you were a diplomat. How do you achieve those things? I mean, they all sound great.

ARÉVALO: With a lot of work, with a lot of imagination, and with a lot of determination. But we need—what you need to have is real political will on the side of the international community to commit itself to a working process. And sometimes that places—that generates questions internally for each of these countries. It’s not an easy issue for anybody, but if we don’t tackle it seriously the level of suffering and the potential effect that that can have in the—in peace around the world is terrible.

CARUSO-CABRERA: So we’re headed toward the end of this section, then we’ll turn it to the audience, but let’s wrap it up with more about Guatemala in particular. You’re here in New York. You’ve met with investors while you’re here.

ARÉVALO: We are meeting, yes. We’re starting actually today, and the next two days I’m going to be meeting different groups of investors.

CARUSO-CABRERA: What’s your elevator pitch? What are you telling them about investing in Guatemala? (Laughter.)

ARÉVALO: Well, come and grow with us and invest in a country that is rescuing its democratic institutions, that is investing in creating the conditions that you need for investment—rule of law, infrastructure, and human development, that has one of the best macroeconomic indicators in the region, and that has open relationship with the United States but it’s also the key to have access to markets not only in Guatemala, but South Mexico, and all Central America, and the Caribbean.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Your macro environment is stable. Your currency has been stable for a very long time, which would be very attractive to investors. I think the one concern they might have is when they look at, for example, Transparency International, you’re ranked 154^th out of 180 countries. On a scale of zero to one hundred, you’re at twenty-three, with one hundred being the best. Combatting corruption, which is what you ran on and why you got elected—

ARÉVALO: There you go.

CARUSO-CABRERA: How do you—how do you combat corruption? And what’s going to be your measure of success, do you think?

ARÉVALO: With corruption? Well, first of all, the first measure of success is by ensuring that executive branch of power conducts business transparently. That’s within our purview. That’s what we can do. That’s what can we assure. We are the ones that sign the contracts to build roads, and public works, and whatnot. And we are committing to that principle. And then we are—as I told, we are seeing very positive movement on the side of the process of election of new judges that give us hope that actually what is going to—what we’re going to be witnessing in the next years is a process in which the courts are going to claim back justice as the corrupt actors are being left out of positions. So, yes, that’s our biggest weakness, but that’s why we were elected. And that’s what we are here to change.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Great. At this time, I’d like to invite members, both in person and also virtually, to join our conversation with their questions. A reminder, this meeting is on the record. This gentleman was first with his hand up, so I’ll throw to him. Is there a microphone being handed around, or do people just ask? It’s fine. Go ahead. We can hear you. Go ahead. What’s your name?

Q: My name is Stephen Schlesinger.

And I wanted to ask you about the attorney general. I gather she—

CARUSO-CABRERA: Here’s the microphone. Stephen Schlesinger is asking about the attorney general.

Q: I wanted to ask you—my name is Stephen Schlesinger.

I wanted to ask you about the attorney general. I believe she has two more years in office. How do you get around her? Are you going to just wait until she retires? Or are you trying to do other ways of—obviously, she’s an obstacle in many ways.

ARÉVALO: She is the biggest obstacle.

CARUSO-CABRERA: It’s putting it kindly, yes. (Laughs.)

ARÉVALO: She is the biggest obstacle. And we have—we have made it very clear. I have asked her to resign. I invited her to resign. Of course, she’s not accepting the invitation. And I have said that I’m going to make every legal effort that I—that I can to substitute her. And that’s what we are doing. We have introduced a bill in Congress to promote an amendment to the law of the attorney general’s office that will enable us to do it. And that’s—and there’s another possibility in terms of another action that goes through Congress. And we have already introduced the bill in Congress, and we are just discussing and negotiating.

I am not going to act—I mean, we’re going to do whatever we can within what we can do legally. We are not going to cease in our effort to try to get her out of office, because we do believe firmly that she is a fundamental obstacle. Not for us as a government, for actually the recuperation of justice and democracy in my country.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Right here. Lady in the yellow.

Q: Thank you very much. My name is Natalie Jaresko. I’m the former minister of finance of Ukraine and currently with EY-Parthenon.

I wanted to thank you for being one of the very few Latin American leaders that have made an incredible effort to support Ukraine since the onslaught of the full-scale invasion. May I ask you how you would recommend Ukraine, the United States, and the allies to bring more Latin American leaders and countries to that understanding, to that level of support?

ARÉVALO: I don’t know if I’m in a position to recommend to you, but I will say that the argument that for us it’s critical is what type of world do we have—do we want in the future. Do we want a world—an international world ruled by law, or do we want just, you know, the law of the jungle? And for us, the invasion of Ukraine was a critical breach by a member of the Security Council of one of the fundamental principles of international law. And for a country like us, like Guatemala, for a small country with big neighbors around, the structure of an international system in which the laws guarantee some level of, you know, equality in the face of the law is a fundamental principle. It enables us. It gives us better opportunities. The multilateral system is, for us, critical in terms of actually enabling us to come together and to identify ways to work. And that is what the Russian invasion of Ukraine threatens. And for us, that’s why our—if you argue that what you are discussing is not, you know, Euro-Asiatic politics but the principle of rule of law and what type of world do we have, then you can have a different conversation. So that’s what I would say.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Let’s go to a virtual question.

OPERATOR: We’ll take the next question from Clifford Krauss. Mr. Krauss, please accept the unmute now prompt.

Q: I just did. Thank you very much, Mr. President.

I had the pleasure of covering your country for several years for the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, and I wanted to ask you a question—a historical question. Your father, of course, was a great reformer, was president of Guatemala at a tumultuous moment. Of course, the revolution that he led came to an unfortunate end when his successor—after his successor took over, Árbenz. And I’m wondering what you learned from your father—because I’m sure you remember a lot of that—what you learned from your father, both what to do and what not to do, that you’re currently using.

ARÉVALO: How many chapters we have for that question? (Laughter.) Because it’s not a simple answer. (Laughs.)

I would—I would answer to you that what I learned from my father is that the possibilities for action are provided by the context in which you are moving. You have to really understand what are the conditions—internal and internationally—which are moving that would actually sustain your path toward the goals that you want to reach.

He was living at the moment—completely different moment internally and internationally, and he came into power following a revolution. He had 85 percent of Congress or 95 percent of Congress on his side. And so our conditions are extremely different. We are not living the Cold War, thank God, but we are going into a different—if we do not care, we are going into a very complex world, going now.

So that, at the end of the day, what I’m learning is—what I learned is he—even if the revolution finally was toppled, the foundations of the modern state of Guatemala were the ones that were set during his period. Everything. At that moment, my country came into modernity, and that was because he was reading exactly what needed to happen in terms to build solid foundations. So I think that that capacity of understanding the contexts in which you are moving and knowing how can you set the foundations of change even if change needs to happen way after you have to leave office.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Question here in the front.

Q: Thank you.

CARUSO-CABRERA: We’re going to bring you a mic. Just tell us who you are.

Q: Yes, absolutely. So this is a follow up to Mr. Schlesinger’s question. I’m Joel Simon. I also—I’m also a journalist, began my career in Guatemala, and led the Committee to Protect Journalists. Now I teach journalism at the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism here in New York City.

And I wanted to ask you about a friend of mine, José Rubén Zamora. I met him. He’s somebody I admire tremendously. I actually had a chance to visit him. He’s in prison in Guatemala in reprisal. These are retaliatory charges against him in reprisal for his critical journalism. You know, when you were elected, of course, we were hopeful that his case would be resolved. It’s a terrible injustice. And yet, he remains in prison. So I wonder if you could update us on his situation and what you’re doing to try and resolve his case. Thank you very much.

ARÉVALO: Yeah. José Rubén Zamora remains in jail because, precisely, we have no control over the justice system in a republican—in our republican system. The next morning after my inauguration, the minister of interior went to visit José Rubén at his cell and discussed with him the change of the conditions in which he was being detained, which were tantamount to torture. And we—in accordance to him, we improved them as much as we can legally, because we also have to do it in the context of our legal system. We offered him a change of prison, as well, which he considered and he declined at the end. And we continuously—we continuously visit him in order to inquire about his conditions, and try to help and improve them as much as we can. But we cannot change our judicial order, and it’s not within our reach.

I have made publicly that I believe that José Rubén Zamora is a perfect example of the abuse of justice that you have. He is the victim of this corrupt system that not only wanted to punish him for his, you know, very active journalism denouncing corruption, but he wanted to make him a cautionary tale to all other journalists and activists that were trying to resist the corrupt regime. And that’s why he is in jail.

In every way that we can, we try to work with him on different areas. But we do not have control over the courts. And it is the courts, the ones that are deciding whether he stays or not.

CARUSO-CABRERA: A question there in the back.

Q: Greetings, Mr. President. My name is Candace Jackson. I am a guest here today and I’m not a journalist. (Laughter.) I am probably best representing my nine-year-old daughter, almost ten—ten-year-old daughter who is Afro-Chapina and her family.

ARÉVALO: Oh! Nice.

Q: (Speaks in Spanish.)

(Continues in English.) And so I’m delighted to be here in your presence today. And I have a host of questions, but I’ll narrow it down to one.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Please. (Laughter.)

Q: You talked earlier about poverty being among Guatemala’s fundamental problems/challenges, and you also talked a little bit earlier about visiting with corporations with respect to investment. I’d love to hear you talk a little bit more about what does development look like in terms of addressing the poverty and to what degree, if possible, small-business development plays into that shifting the poverty paradigm.

ARÉVALO: Yeah. Thank you very much for your question. We see development—well, the fight of—fighting poverty is a fundamental goal for our government. That’s without any question. The problem is, how do you do it when you’re addressing a 500-year gap of exclusion, of discrimination, of racism, and everything? So we believe that at the end of the day poverty is going to be resolved precisely by what you are saying, is, we need more jobs. And we need more entrepreneurs. In our—we have two key strategies for development. One is addressing the poorest parts of the country. We are going—which is, if you’re familiar with Guatemala, which is San Marcos, Huehuetenango, Quiche, Verapaz, and the dry corridor. So it’s arch where you have the concentration of poverty, the concentration of malnutrition, the concentration of indigenous peoples.

And when you look at that region and you contrast it with the map of infrastructure investment in the country, you find out that it’s been completely abandoned and sidelined by investments. So we made a decision to concentrate our investment in development infrastructure in that arch of the country. We’re going to be investing in secondary roads and roads, which are going to be connecting microrregiones productivas. How do you say that in English?

CARUSO-CABRERA: Small, micro—

ARÉVALO: Micro-productive regions, which is not just connecting the towns but actually connecting regions which are identified by their productive potential, agricultural or otherwise. And then we’re going to be aggregating to this investment in health, in education.

We’re going to be bringing agricultural support in the form of credits and in the form of technical assistance extensions program. We want also to add that a layer of association, cooperativismo, you know, different types, so that we can bring people and generate conditions by which this population, which is now fundamentally, you know, just surviving on subsistence agriculture, we can help to turn them into small agricultural producers, and then connect—bring them into the economy, and connect them to the value chains that can lead them to market, supermarkets, or export as well.

And we are already—there’s already some interest on the side of the potential buyers of produce, of these types of things. We believe that that is going to have a huge effect in the poorest regions of the country. So that we are not going—and we are doing so because we believe that by bringing them into the economy based on what they can produce, they’re going to have a huge effect and impact in all those regions. So we’re going to—if you want, we’re going to be pushing the poorest up. So in order to reduce the gap.

Together with that, we’re going to really start investing in strategic infrastructure—ports, airports, you know, metro rail in Guatemala City, big roads. And we’re going to be doing this together with private investment. This is going to generate a lot of jobs. And these jobs, again, are going to generate a cycle in the economy. We believe that by the combined effort of this, we’re going to have a real contribution to jobs and a fight against poverty.

And two other elements that we’re going to be having. We’re going to—we already have two funds. One fund for small and medium entrepreneurs, but that are going to be given with really preferential interest rates. They are going to be really, really under what you can find today in the commercial banking—in the commercial banks. And a fund which is going to be open to enterprises big and small to invest in—to make investments in technological conversion, so that they can begin to bring more technology into producing process. So we believe that by having a combination of interventions, we’re going to generate ways to—mechanisms to improve the economy of the people in general.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Let’s go to a question, a virtual question.

OPERATOR: We’ll take our next question from Alberto Mora.

Q: Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. President.

After the depart—after CICIG departed from Guatemala, the attack on the rule of law seemed to deepen and accelerate in a—in a drastic way. More than forty of the leading judges, prosecutors, independent lawyers, and journalists were driven into exile in the country. And what was more dismaying about this, that it’s—this effort against the rule of law seemed to have the support of many of the elite business leaders in the—in the country. And so two parts to this question. First part is, is Guatemala reintegrating these exiled leaders back into society, back into their former positions? And, second, what can you do to increase the level of support among the elite business leaders in the country towards your reform program to restore the rule of law and recover democracy in the country?

ARÉVALO: OK. In the first part of your question, again, the problem is that the reason why we have this community in exile is because they are running, they’re escaping the—they’re being crime analyzed by the justice system. They’re being persecuted spuriously and falsely by the general attorney’s office and by the courts. They do not come back into the country because they are concerned about the fact that if they come into the country they’re going to be thrown into jail immediately because of these spurious cases and accusations. And again, that is something we’re in constant contact with them. But this is something that we cannot resolve. But it’s in the hands of the courts. What we are doing is we’re working with them to have programs that provide support to them while they are away in the United States, or in Mexico, in other places, working with organizations so that we can, you know, ease the situation in which they are living at this point in time.

And the second one is that actually even before I came into office we started a series of dialogs with all actors in society during the transition. Remember that we had a very long transition. Between the second round and the inauguration, we have six months span. It’s huge. And during that time, we had rounds of conversations and dialog tables with many actors, including the private sector, including the indigenous actors. We actually brought together for the first time indigenous leaders and the private sector to discuss how to address—you know, how to counter what they were trying to do in terms of turning the electoral results. And we have continued with this round of contacts and conversations. And we are working with the private sector around the goals that we have.

It doesn’t mean that everybody in the private sector—and I have no doubt that probably some individuals still consider us absolutely dangerous and will—might find a way to collaborate with the—with these corrupt elites. Well, they themselves participate in that probably. But as a group, we are working together with the private sector. Actually, we have a group of businessmen that are coming for the meetings that we are having with the U.S. investors in New York. And they are carrying on also to Washington in order to have meeting with other actors. And that’s an expression of the collaboration that we’re having at this point.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Back of the room there. Gentleman.

Q: Thank you. My name is Roberto Patiño. I’m the founder of Alimenta La Soldiaridad, which is one of the biggest humanitarian efforts in Venezuela.

So going back to the question of Venezuela, first, I want to appreciate your strong voice for democracy in Venezuela. But in order to put more pressure on Maduro to accept a negotiation, there are two proposals that have been on the table that I want to get your reaction to. The first one would be to—in the face of the evidence that Edmundo Gonzalez won, just outright recognize Edmundo Gonzalez as the victor of the election. And the second one would be to request an organization, such as International IDEA for both sides to bring the evidence of the tallies, that’s how they call—they act as the tallies, for an independent international institution to make—to analyze which side is saying the truth. So I would love to hear your reaction to those proposals.

ARÉVALO: What you’re saying is—the second proposal that you mentioned is exactly what we have been thinking of. Could be IDEA. Could be, you know, the European Union. Anybody that actually is accepted by both sides and that is provided by the actual tallies, and that are provided with conditions in which they can perform their work. Yeah, it can be IDEA. It can be anybody. So that’s a mechanism that we believe could actually resolve the problem.

On the first one, the point is that I’m not sure—I know that that’s a demand that is that is out there at this point in time, but I’m not sure what it will be achieving in actually resolving the situation. Because what you want is, for example, your second proposal actually finds a way in which both parties agree to abide by this counting and that actually accepting whatever is a result. And that would be—get you out of the crisis. And the other solution is just another step in it, not a way to solve the crisis.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Right here. Gentlemen here.

Q: Thank you, Mr. President. Adam Silverschotz.

China has been making significant investments in your neighborhood, training military police, building ports, upgrading airfields, you name it. And you, unique to your neighborhood, have a special relationship with Taiwan. At the same time, after your election the business community in your country sought to significantly expand business relationships with China, seemingly as a hedge against the increased effort from the United States to support the conclusion of your election. So going forward, I’m curious if you would be able to contextualize the opportunity for CHIPS Act funding and the kind of trilateral relationship between Taiwan, the U.S. and Guatemala with potential pressures that you are feeling domestically with respect to Guatemala’s position on the Taiwan and China relationships.

ARÉVALO: We are not feeling any domestic pressure on that regard.

CARUSO-CABRERA: You don’t have businesspeople saying, China is a huge market, and we should be doing as much as possible to do business with them?

ARÉVALO: There are some people that are saying we should not lose sight of that market. And we’re saying, right. So trade with the PRC has been there for already thirty years. And nobody’s trying to stop it.

CARUSO-CABRERA: This lady here in the red. If you could give her a microphone, please.

Q: Thank you. I’m Alexandra Starr with International Crisis Group.

So my boss, Ivan, said to say hello. (Laughs.)

ARÉVALO: Yeah. Yeah. Please say hi to him.

Q: I will. I will. And thank you for being here.

I wanted to follow up on your comments on the private sector. Jose Fernandez, the undersecretary, was here. And he spoke about the importance he attaches to your administration succeeding. And he spoke a little bit about what the United States has tried to do in terms of applying some pressure behind the scenes on actors who are—what’s the way to put it—making it very difficult, right, for a lot of the reforms you’re talking about to go through. So wondering if you could talk about whether that’s been effective, and if there are broader things the United States and the EU can be doing to ensure that you’re able to realize at least some of your goals.

ARÉVALO: Well, the United States and the EU have been using different measures to try to put pressure on a different range of actions that have gone from visa sanctions to other type of—you know, Magnitsky type of things, and different things. That we have people that are now—well, the attorney general is now proscribed from—she is considered a corrupt actor in thirty-two countries around the world. And many, many people—(inaudible)—and that as well. Well, we believe that all of these measures do help, and do—are part of a framework that is allowing people to think twice before they engage in certain activities, and is providing an incentive for others to engage more constructively. But we are not measuring it. We don’t know exactly what and how. So, yeah.

CARUSO-CABRERA: But you’re satisfied with the level? I mean, understandably, I think someone in your position could say the U.S. or the EU could always do more. But you’re happy with the level of support that you’re getting?

ARÉVALO: Well, I—no, I think that in general what we have is a very frank and open conversation with the United States and the European Union on what is going on and, yes, so we have a very good discussion.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Let’s go to a virtual question.

OPERATOR: We’ll take our next question from Donald Zilkha.

Q: Thank you very much, Mr. President, for speaking to us. You run a very beautiful country. It’s—I know it because my wife is a Chapina, and we also have homes in Guatemala. So what I find disappointing is the lack of interest on the part of foreigners to build and run property and own properties in Guatemala. Unlike Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic, which have seen a huge building boom there and a lot of interest on that part. And also, given the fact that the aging population in the U.S. could be drawn to that—to the country. It’s certainly very, very beautiful. Do you have any plans focused on that, as opposed to large infrastructure? But just those sort of links might create a much broader sort of flow of income? I know that immigrant remittances are 15 to 20 percent, but this would be different and probably more permanent.

ARÉVALO: I believe that the reason why people are not flocking with foreign investment into Guatemala is because up until now we have not had the right conditions to welcome those from economic conditions, if it’s industrial investment in terms of infrastructure, the security levels that you have and the issues of social development that are fundamental. So we’re going to be working in solving those issues. So I believe that—I hope that in the future the conditions will be there and people will actually begin to come because, as you mentioned, the country has really a lot to offer to foreign investors.

CARUSO-CABRERA: One last question here from the room. Let’s see, this gentleman here. Sorry, he had his hand up before you. (Laughs.)

Q: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President.

And building on that last question, a word I didn’t hear a lot was “tourism.” Myself, my only experience in Guatemala is tourism. And as you spoke about the region that’s in greatest need of development, you focused on what they are poor in but not necessarily what they may be rich in, which is sort of untouched landscapes and indigenous culture. And it’s also climate week, and so talking about, you know—it’s very easy talking about agriculture to think, oh, we’re going to bring down rainforests and plant something new, which cuts counter to what might be appealing—

CARUSO-CABRERA: Your question is about tourism? Sorry. Yeah. (Laughs.)

Q: It’s a question about tourism. And so, yeah, while you’re visiting with investors, are you also visiting with influencers and travel bloggers?

ARÉVALO: No, the other way around. I mean, we didn’t touch it for us. I think that long term there are two key industries for the development of the economy in Guatemala. One of them is tourism, and we can begin to tap into it relatively easily and quick.

The other is something that I happen to believe—and I don’t know if everybody believes—which is biotechnology, because we have one of the richest biomasses in the—in the world, and we just don’t know what we have, and we are not investing and researching and using it. And I think that that requires mid- to long-term investment to see the yields happen.

Tourism, on the contrary, is happening already. And we actually are working to see it expand significantly without—in a way that does not affect, as you said, the richness that we have, because what we have is this untouched nature that we have been able to keep. As you know, it’s the sunny side of underdevelopment, if you want, and that we believe is at this point one of our biggest strategic assets.

So, no, we don’t believe—we are not going to be cutting down woods and jungle in order to make room for agriculture. There’s enough already open fields for this. On the contrary, you know that we are the first country in Latin—I think that in the hemisphere that has already achieved the goal of having 30 percent of its land being declared reserved?

CARUSO-CABRERA: Reserved.

ARÉVALO: Protected. We are the first one. And we are not going to stop there. We’re going to be expanding, and we’re going to be investing into carbon markets, and so on and so forth.

CARUSO-CABRERA: Terrific. At this time, please, the New York audience, please stay seated. The CFR staffers are going to open the door in a second. We want to thank the president for being here. A real pleasure to have you here. Thank you.

ARÉVALO: Thank you very much. (Applause.)

(END)

This is an uncorrected transcript.