US diplomatic cables expose divide over immigration

US ambassadors from El Salvador, Honduras and Haiti sent urgent cables to the White House in the early days of the Trump administration, pleading with them to abandon plans to send hundreds of thousands of migrants back to their home countries.

The cables, made public Thursday, expose the divide between career diplomats and a new administration eager to push through major hardline immigration policies even as it apparently weighed possible fallout on the 2020 presidential race.

Facing legal challenges, the Trump administration later backed down from its hardline position and last month it extended protections for at least a year as US courts work through the disputes.

The internal State Department memos are contained in a report by Senate Democrats that sheds light on diplomats' alarm ahead of the 2017 decision by the Trump administration to end protections for some 400,000 Central Americans and Haitians living legally in the US.

The report suggests that, for the Trump administration, concerns about mass removals of people taking place during the 2020 presidential campaign prevailed over national security warnings from top US diplomats.

The apparent injection of electoral politics in what was supposed to be a policy decision about humanitarian protections for migrants from some of the Western Hemisphere's poorest and most violent countries came from then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson's policy planning staff, comprised of political appointees.

It contrasts with the recommendations of US Embassies in the affected countries El Salvador, Honduras and Haiti as well as the State Department's most-senior career diplomat at the time, then-Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas Shannon.

He argued unsuccessfully that taking away so-called temporary protected status, or TPS, for the migrants would destabilise the region and damage the US' standing in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Nonetheless, the unclassified cables, some of which have surfaced in court battles, provide telling insight on how career officials and political appointees haggled over policy recommendations in the early days of the Trump administration, when the new president's toughened stance on migration went against, in the case of TPS, decades of bipartisan consensus.

"A sudden termination of TPS for El Salvador would undermine additional cooperation to tackle the root causes of illegal migration and overwhelm the country's ability to absorb the refugees," then-US Ambassador Jean Elizabeth Manes wrote in a July 2017 cable to Washington, one of several recommendations received that summer from veteran diplomats who strenuously objected to the decision.

They were backed by Shannon, who was even more unequivocal.

"It is our purpose to provide the best possible foreign policy and diplomatic advice," Shannon wrote in a private letter to Tillerson, cited in the report by the minority staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

"From my point of view that advice is obvious: extend TPS for the countries indicated."
"Despite these warnings, the Trump administration recklessly sought to end the TPS designations for El Salvador, Honduras, and Haiti with full knowledge of the inherent dangers of its decisions," Sen. Bob Menendez, the ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said in an introduction to the report titled "Playing Politics With Humanitarian Protections: How Political Aims Trumped U.S. National Security and the Safety of TPS Recipients."