Paraguay’s Chamber of Deputies voted Tuesday to allow U.S. military and civilian personnel temporary presence within its borders, marking a significant expansion of American influence in Latin America under the Trump administration’s security strategy.
Defense Agreement Passes With Strong Support
The Status of Forces Agreement passed with 53 votes in favor, eight against, and four abstentions among the 80-member chamber. Fifteen lawmakers were absent for the vote. The agreement, signed in Washington last December, establishes legal parameters for U.S. security forces to conduct training exercises, joint operations, and humanitarian missions on Paraguayan soil. The treaty grants the United States criminal jurisdiction over its personnel while operating in the country.
Chamber President Raul Latorre supported the final vote, which both the U.S. State Department and Paraguayan Foreign Minister Ruben Ramirez Lezcano called historic. The Senate approved the measure last week after a more contentious debate centered on sovereignty concerns and immunity provisions for foreign troops.
Sovereignty Concerns Spark Opposition
Critics challenged a controversial provision granting U.S. military personnel immunity from prosecution equivalent to diplomatic protection. Independent Congressman Raul Benitez opposed the agreement, stating his belief in international cooperation balanced with strong institutions and democratic sovereignty. Civil organizations, including Peace and Justice Service, argued that national security cannot be built by importing troops or shielding foreign agents with diplomatic immunity.
Strategic Expansion in Latin America
The agreement advances the Trump administration’s objectives to strengthen American military presence throughout Latin America. Foreign Minister Ramirez defended the partnership in December as necessary to combat transnational organized crime and terrorism, while explicitly stating that no permanent U.S. military bases would be established in Paraguay. The approval positions Paraguay as a key partner in regional security operations while civil society groups continue raising concerns about potential sovereignty erosion. Washington views the agreement as crucial to its broader national security strategy in the region.