El Salvador frees jailed Venezuelan migrants in US prisoner deal
The 252 men were accused – without evidence – of being gang members and flown to the notorious CECOT 'anti-terror' jail last March.
There, they were shackled, shorn and paraded before cameras – becoming emblematic of Trump's immigration crackdown and drawing howls of protest.
On Friday, after months of legal challenges and political stonewalling, the men arrived at an airport near Caracas.
The Trump administration said they were released in exchange for 10 Americans or US residents held in Venezuela, and an undefined number of 'political prisoners.'
'Today, we have handed over all the Venezuelan nationals detained in our country,' Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele said on social media.
The migrants' return to Venezuela sparked tearful celebrations from family members who had heard nothing from them in months.
'I don't have words to explain how I feel!' said Juan Yamarte. 'My brother (Mervin) is back home, back in Venezuela.'
Mervin's mother said she could not contain her happiness. 'I arranged a party and I'm making a soup,' she said.
The men had been deported from the United States under rarely used wartime powers and denied court hearings.
Exiled Salvadoran rights group Cristosal believes that just seven of the 252 men had criminal records.
Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro thanked Trump for 'the decision to rectify this totally irregular situation.'
In the United States, families were also excited to see their loved ones return. One had been imprisoned for nearly a year.
Global Reach, an NGO that works for wrongly detained Americans, said one of the men freed was 37-year-old Lucas Hunter, held since he was 'kidnapped' by Venezuelan border guards while vacationing in Colombia in January.
'We cannot wait to see him in person and help him recover from the ordeal,' it quoted his younger sister Sophie Hunter as saying.
Uruguay said one of its citizens, resident in the United States, was among those liberated after nine months in Venezuelan detention.
Another plane arrived at Maiquetia airport earlier Friday from Houston with 244 Venezuelans deported from the United States and seven children who Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello said had been 'rescued from the kidnapping to which they were being subjected.'
The children were among 30 who Caracas says remained in the US after their Venezuelan parents were deported.
Clamping down on migrants is a flagship pursuit of Trump's administration, which has ramped up raids and deportations.
It has agreed with Maduro to send undocumented Venezuelans back home, and flights have been arriving near daily also from Mexico, where many got stuck trying to enter the United States.
Official figures show that since February, more than 8,200 people have been repatriated to Venezuela from the United States and Mexico, including some 1,000 children.
The Venezuelans detained in El Salvador had no right to phone calls or visits, and their relatives unsuccessfully requested proof of life.
Bukele had CECOT built as part of his war on criminal gangs, but he agreed to receive millions of dollars from the United States to house the Venezuelans there.
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and other rights groups have denounced the detentions as a violation of human rights.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
11 hours ago
- Arab News
Why the Nile dam crisis demands action and accountability
The dispute over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam has become one of the world's major water conflicts. In recent weeks, it has gained renewed international attention, particularly after remarks from US President Donald Trump and a declaration by Ethiopia. As Ethiopia celebrates the 'completion' of the dam, Egypt views the announcement as a direct challenge to international law and a threat to the foundation of its national security. With its inauguration set for September, the question remains: will diplomacy prevail or will unilateralism triumph over cooperation? The GERD is Africa's largest hydroelectric power project, constructed by Ethiopia on the Blue Nile, the main tributary of the Nile River. Launched in 2011, the dam is expected to generate more than 6,000 megawatts of electricity. While it promises much-needed energy for Ethiopia's population, the project has been controversial from the start. Egypt depends on the Nile for 97 percent of its freshwater needs. For more than a century, its water rights were guaranteed by treaties and its downstream position. But the GERD, located just a few kilometers from the Sudanese border, threatens to disrupt that balance. In Cairo, the concern is existential. Despite years of negotiations and a 2015 Declaration of Principles signed by Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan, Addis Ababa has pressed ahead with construction and the phased filling of the dam's reservoir without a binding legal agreement on its operation. Cairo has repeatedly warned that such actions violate international norms governing transboundary watercourses. Ethiopia, however, has largely ignored these warnings, framing the GERD as a sovereign project. Trump this month broke the American diplomatic silence that had defined the Biden years, issuing frank statements about the dam. Speaking at a press conference, Trump described the Nile as the 'lifeline' of the Egyptian people, a description that aligns precisely with Cairo's long-standing argument. He also criticized the American role in having, as he put it, 'stupidly funded' the dam without adequately addressing its consequences. 'I do not know why they didn't solve the problem before they built the dam,' Trump said. For Egypt, these remarks were not only long overdue, but they were also a validation. President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi welcomed the comments, praising Trump's stance. Egyptian diplomats saw the US president's statements as a diplomatic turning point, bringing renewed pressure to bear on Ethiopia's unilateralism. From Ethiopia's side, the response was defensive and dismissive. Officials said the dam was funded domestically and some even portrayed Trump's comments as an insult to Ethiopia's sovereignty. But the broader reality is hard to ignore: the GERD has become a global concern and Ethiopia's dismissiveness only reinforces the perception that it is acting outside the bounds of international consensus. Days before Trump's remarks, Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed announced that all construction on the GERD had been completed. He declared that the dam would be officially inaugurated in September, calling it a victory for Ethiopia and inviting neighboring countries to join in the celebration. Trump this month broke the American diplomatic silence, issuing frank statements about the dam. Dr. Abdellatif El-Menawy But in Egypt, this announcement was met with alarm. Cairo immediately condemned the move as a 'flagrant violation of international law' and an act of provocation. The Egyptian Ministry of Water Resources issued a statement calling Ethiopia's behavior 'destabilizing,' arguing that the move to operate the dam unilaterally undermines every principle of cooperation and trust in international water governance. The Ethiopian government claims that the dam will not reduce water flow downstream and that Egypt's concerns are exaggerated. But these assurances ring hollow, as experts note that the GERD's reservoir can hold 74 billion cubic meters of water, almost the entire annual flow of the Blue Nile. Egypt, already below the global water poverty line, cannot gamble on goodwill. Ethiopia has repeatedly rejected calls to sign a legally binding agreement governing how the dam is filled and managed during droughts. This refusal alone should cause alarm in the international community. What nation would accept such unilateral control over its primary source of life? Sudan, Egypt's southern neighbor and fellow downstream country, has long had an ambivalent position on the GERD. At times, it saw possible benefits, such as regulated water flow and access to cheap electricity. But in recent years, Khartoum has leaned closer to Cairo's position, especially after experiencing erratic water releases and infrastructure concerns. Today, Sudan is wracked by internal conflict and thus largely sidelined in the GERD diplomacy. However, the interim leadership has reaffirmed its opposition to any unilateral action by Ethiopia. In a meeting with El-Sisi last month, Gen. Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan stressed the need for a coordinated solution and joint safeguards. More broadly, the GERD dispute could destabilize the region. It threatens to fracture regional relations, provoke proxy conflicts and fuel instability in a region already grappling with conflict, economic crisis and foreign intervention. Under international law, the use of shared rivers is governed by two core principles: equitable and reasonable use, and the obligation not to cause significant harm. Egypt has abided by these rules and has called, again and again, for negotiations to reach a fair agreement. Ethiopia has adopted a narrow definition of sovereignty that places its national interests above regional stability. While no one denies Ethiopia's right to development, that right must be exercised within a framework of shared responsibility. It cannot come at the expense of 100 million Egyptians and the security of an entire region. The GERD is not a local dam. It is a regional project with continental consequences. Its success or failure will signal whether powerful upstream states can impose their will on downstream neighbors without consequence, or whether diplomacy, legality and fairness can still shape international outcomes. With the dam's inauguration looming and the US now taking a more decisive tone, the coming months will determine the future of one of the most important rivers on Earth. Trump's words, if backed by action, could revive negotiations and pressure Ethiopia to concede. But the international community must act decisively. Ethiopia's unilateralism cannot become the new norm. Letting one country control another's lifeline — without oversight, agreement or accountability — sets a dangerous precedent not just for Africa but for all transboundary river systems around the world.
Arab News
11 hours ago
- Arab News
Europe's moral authority in tatters after failing to sanction Israel
The EU last week faced a defining test of its commitment to human rights and international law — and it failed. Presented with irrefutable evidence of Israeli war crimes in Gaza, the bloc's foreign ministers gathered in Brussels to consider 10 possible actions: from suspending the EU-Israel Association Agreement to imposing sanctions on Israeli officials and banning trade with illegal settlements. Yet, in the end, they took the politically easy path, securing a handful of humanitarian concessions from Israel in return for shelving all meaningful accountability. Let me be clear: aid access is essential. Gaza's suffering is beyond comprehension. And Palestinians dying from bullets and hunger will no doubt appreciate any relief. But allowing Israel to dictate the terms of food and medical relief — as if these are diplomatic chips and not legal obligations — strips humanitarianism of its moral force. EU officials may consider what they accomplished a 'diplomatic success.' They will state that they used diplomatic leverage to push for aid delivery. But what the EU hails as progress is, in truth, a lowering of the bar so far that the basic survival of a besieged population becomes the summit of European diplomacy. This is not only disappointing. It is dangerous. The EU-Israel Association Agreement explicitly states that respect for human rights is a cornerstone of bilateral relations. Yet, even after clear violations — documented by Amnesty International, the UN and dozens of credible nongovernmental organizations — the EU opted to maintain business as usual. Israel continues to enjoy access to European markets, research programs and diplomatic forums while violating the very principles the agreement is meant to uphold. According to Amnesty International, Israel has killed women and children with no evidence of any military target nearby. Journalists, medical personnel, ambulance drivers and kitchen supply teams have been killed without accountability. Schools, hospitals, bakeries and houses have been shelled. The UN's Independent International Commission of Inquiry further concluded that Israel's total blockade on Gaza — cutting off food, water, electricity and fuel — amounts to collective punishment and may constitute a crime against humanity or genocide. Despite this, the EU, which has implemented harsh sanctions against the Russian occupiers of Ukraine, chose not to sanction complicit officials and not to halt trade with illegal settlements. This inaction occurred even after its own diplomats, along with church leaders, saw with their own eyes the destruction caused to Palestinians and churches in the West Bank town of Al-Taybeh. If Europe still believes in its founding principles — human dignity, the rule of law and justice — then it must act like it. Daoud Kuttab In 2024, when independently documented Israeli war crimes were widely reported, the total two-way trade in goods between Israel and EU member states was €42.6 billion ($49.5 billion). The EU accounted for about 32 percent of Israel's total goods trade, contributing roughly 34.2 percent of its imports and 28.8 percent of its exports, making it Tel Aviv's biggest trading partner. Instead of agreeing on any one of the 10 sanctions options, EU officials — who needed a consensus of all 27 member countries — negotiated for food trucks, fuel for hospitals and other humanitarian aid that is already an obligation to be provided by an occupier according to international humanitarian law. This moral abdication is more than a policy failure — it is a betrayal of the EU's legal commitments. Europe's inaction sends a dangerous message: that Israel can commit atrocities with impunity. No political price. No trade penalty. No sanctions. The Geneva Conventions are not suggestions — they are binding obligations. And if countries that tout the rule of law allow them to be violated without consequence, their credibility collapses. Europe's silence does not just embolden Israel, it weakens the global order that holds war criminals accountable. The impact of this decision will not be confined to Gaza. If Israel, a state benefiting from billions in EU trade and cooperation, can bomb hospitals, starve civilians and raze homes with no repercussions, then what incentive remains for any state to respect humanitarian law? Europe's moral authority now lies in tatters. Some of the countries that prevented the EU from doing the right thing included Germany, Hungary, Italy and the Czech Republic. The fear of diplomatic fallout and the need to preserve internal cohesion at all costs outweighed the courage to uphold justice. Still, there is a path forward. If the EU as a whole will not act, its member states must. National governments should suspend arms transfers, ban trade with illegal settlements and sever cooperation with institutions complicit in occupation and apartheid. These are not radical steps, they are legal necessities. The stakes are too high for empty statements. Every day without accountability is a day of impunity, a day when another child dies under rubble, another family starves behind a blockade and another future is extinguished. If Europe still believes in its founding principles — human dignity, the rule of law and justice — then it must act like it. Because history is watching. And so are the people of Gaza.
Al Arabiya
11 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
Trump's latest demand: Washington football and Cleveland baseball teams should change names back
President Donald Trump wants Washington's football franchise and Cleveland's baseball team to revert to their former names. Trump said Sunday on his Truth Social site that 'The Washington Whatevers' should 'IMMEDIATELY change their name back to the Washington Redskins Football Team.' 'There is a big clamoring for this. Likewise the Cleveland Indians, one of the six original baseball teams with a storied past. Our great Indian people in massive numbers want this to happen. Their heritage and prestige is systematically being taken away from them. Times are different now than they were three or four years ago. We are a Country of passion and common sense. OWNERS GET IT DONE!!!' For all the latest headlines, follow our Google News channel online or via the app. Josh Harris, whose group bought the Commanders from former owner Dan Snyder in 2023, said earlier this year the name was here to stay. Not long after taking over, Harris quieted speculation about going back to Redskins, saying that would not happen. Guardians president of baseball operations Chris Antonetti indicated before Sunday's game against the Athletics that there weren't any plans to revisit the name change. 'We understand there are different perspectives on the decision we made a few years ago but obviously it's a decision we made. We've got the opportunity to build a brand as the Guardians over the last four years and are excited about the future that's in front of us,' he said. Both teams have had their current names since the 2022 seasons. Washington dropped Redskins after the 2019 season and was known as the Washington Football Team for two years before moving to Commanders. Cleveland announced in December 2020 it would drop Indians. It announced the switch to Guardians in July 2021. In 2018, the team phased out Chief Wahoo as its primary logo. The name changes had their share of supporters and critics as part of national discussions about institutions and teams to drop logos and names considered racist. The Guardians are the fifth name for Cleveland's baseball franchise. It joined the American League in 1901 as one of the eight charter franchises as the Blues. It switched to the Bronchos a year later and used the Naps from 1903 through 1914 before moving to the Indians in 1915. Washington started in Boston as the Redskins in 1933 before moving to the nation's capital four years later. Washington and Cleveland share another thing in common. David Blitzer is a member of Harris' ownership group with the Commanders and holds a minority stake in the Guardians.
