Nayib Bukele Responds to Hillary Clinton: Here’s What He Told Her

El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele has delivered a characteristically bold and sarcastic response to former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton after she shared a post critical of his government’s maximum-security prison, CECOT.

The exchange highlights the ongoing clash between Bukele’s highly successful security policies and the narrative pushed by certain international human rights organizations, media outlets, and political figures.

The Exchange

Clinton shared a post referring to CECOT as a “brutal El Salvadoran prison,” echoing criticisms often leveled by various NGOs and media organizations.

Bukele’s response on X (formerly Twitter) was direct and provocative:

“Madam Secretary Hillary Clinton,

If you are convinced that torture is taking place at CECOT, El Salvador is ready to cooperate fully.

We are willing to release our entire prison population (including all gang leaders and all those described as ‘political prisoners’) to any country willing to receive them. The only condition is straightforward: it must be everyone.

This would also greatly assist journalists and your favorite NGOs, who would then have thousands of former inmates available for interviews, making it far easier to find additional voices critical of the Salvadoran government (or willing to confirm whatever conclusions are already expected).

Surely, if these testimonies reflect a systemic reality, a much larger pool of sources should only reinforce the claim, and many governments should be eager to offer protection.

Until then, we will continue prioritizing the human rights of the millions of Salvadorans who today live free from gang rule.

Respectfully,
Nayib Bukele”

The Context: Security Success vs. International Criticism

Bukele’s response isn’t just about one prison—it’s about defending a security strategy that has transformed El Salvador from one of the world’s most dangerous countries to one with record-low homicide rates.

The Results Speak for Themselves:

• El Salvador ended 2025 with a record low of homicides nationwide (projected 1.2–1.4 per 100,000)—a staggering achievement for a country that once averaged over 100 homicides per 100,000.
• Salvadoran citizens now enjoy unprecedented freedom from gang violence and extortion that once controlled entire neighborhoods.

The Critics:
Despite these measurable improvements in public safety, Bukele’s policies face relentless criticism from:

• International human rights organizations that claim he has “replaced gang violence with state violence”
• Media outlets that frame his security measures as human rights violations while downplaying their effectiveness
• Certain political figures who align with narratives that prioritize the rights of incarcerated individuals over the safety of ordinary citizens
• NGOs funded by sources with clear political interests that continue to attack the Salvadoran government’s approach

The Core of Bukele’s Argument

Bukele’s response exposes what he sees as the hypocrisy of his critics:

1. The offer is a challenge: If conditions in Salvadoran prisons are truly as terrible as claimed, other countries—particularly those whose politicians and NGOs criticize El Salvador—should be eager to accept these prisoners.
2. The prioritization of rights: Bukele explicitly states his government prioritizes “the human rights of the millions of Salvadorans who today live free from gang rule” over the concerns of international organizations focused solely on prisoner treatment.
3. The media/NGO dynamic: He highlights how journalists and NGOs selectively use prisoner testimonies to support predetermined conclusions about his government.

Why This Matters

This exchange represents more than just diplomatic sparring. It encapsulates a fundamental debate about security, sovereignty, and human rights:

• Effectiveness vs. Hidden Agendas: Bukele’s policies have demonstrably saved thousands of lives, yet face orchestrated criticism from organizations that have clearly revealed their interests. These groups cloak their pro-crime advocacy and political agendas behind the convenient narrative of “human rights,” prioritizing the protection of violent criminals over the safety and fundamental rights of innocent populations.
• Sovereignty: The Salvadoran government asserts its right to determine its own security policies without interference from foreign actors with different priorities.
• Redefining human rights: Bukele’s administration argues that safety from violence is the most fundamental human right, and that his policies have delivered this to millions.

The Bottom Line

International critics and media outlets continue to push a narrow narrative fixated on prison conditions, a narrative often manufactured or amplified by organizations with political agendas.

This stands in stark contrast to the reality experienced daily by Salvadorans: a historic peace and security that has liberated communities from gang rule.

The overwhelming evidence—record-low homicide rates, thriving public spaces, and Bukele’s sustained approval ratings above 80%—proves that the Salvadoran people not only agree with his priorities but are living the results. The critics’ story is a selective fiction; the security and will of the nation are the undeniable facts.

---

The president’s challenge to Clinton and other critics is simple: if you believe you can do better, prove it by accepting the prisoners you claim are being mistreated. Until then, El Salvador will continue its successful security strategy that has given its people something they haven’t had in decades: peace.

---

Did You Know?

The large-scale, systematic deportation of Salvadorans from the United States—a policy that directly fueled the expansion of transnational gangs like MS-13 and Barrio 18 in El Salvador—began in earnest during the administration of President Bill Clinton (1993–2001). Key legislation in 1996 dramatically increased deportations.

At the time, Hillary Clinton was the First Lady of the United States. While not a policymaker herself, she was a prominent figure in the administration whose legacy is now ironically linked to a policy consequence that fueled the very gang crisis which later made the CECOT mega-prison necessary—the same facility she now describes as a “brutal Salvadoran prison.”

What’s your take? Should countries prioritize the safety of their citizens over international criticism of their methods? Share your thoughts below.