Connect with us

News

How Ecuador became mired in a ‘state of war’ with drug gangs

Published

on

How Ecuador became mired in a ‘state of war’ with drug gangs

The newscast began like any other. Jorge Rendón, a veteran broadcaster at Ecuador’s state-owned TC Televisión in the bustling port city of Guayaquil, was running through the day’s stories with his co-anchor.

Then, with cameras rolling and the feed broadcast live to the nation, masked gunmen burst into the studio, brandishing high-calibre rifles and grenades. Some of the crew were forced to lie prone on the floor, others sat with their hands bound. Elsewhere in the building, audible on-air before the feed went down, shots were fired.

“It was terrifying, a moment of chaos and extreme tension,” Rendón tells the Financial Times. “They tried to make us speak out against the government, against the police, and against the world . . . it was an afternoon of chaos.”

A police task force retook the studio soon after, arresting 13 intruders and liberating the hostages, but across the country similarly harrowing scenes were playing out, triggered by the escape of jailed drug-lord Adolfo “Fito” Macías from his cell in the nearby Regional prison on January 7. 

In the days since Fito — leader of one of the country’s most prominent gangs, Los Choneros — sprung jail, bedlam has engulfed Ecuador. Over 158 prison guards and staff have been taken hostage by inmates in seven prisons, vehicles and buildings around the country have been set ablaze, and at least 15 people, including police offers, have been murdered. 

Advertisement
Three men stand outside a TV studio building
Journalists José Luis Calderón, Jorge Rendón and Stalin Baquerizo outside the TC Televisión studios in Guayaquil, where they had been held hostage by gang members © Reuters

President Daniel Noboa, a 36-year-old US-educated scion of a banana empire who took office in November promising a tough line on crime, on Wednesday said that Ecuador was “at war” with drug-traffickers, a day after signing a decree making them military targets. He also declared a nationwide two-month state of emergency, including nightly curfews.

The harrowing events of this week brought home a stark reality for many Ecuadoreans: that their country, once a relatively peaceful tourist destination sandwiched between bigger and more violent neighbours, is on track to become the latest Latin American country crippled by narco-trafficking.

Criminals maraud with impunity, corruption often goes unanswered, and politicians are co-opted, threatened, or worse — Fernando Villavicencio, a former investigative journalist and anti-corruption candidate for president, was assassinated last August.

GM130124_24X Ecuador map_WEB

According to the Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences (Flacso) in Quito, Ecuador’s homicide rate has increased nine-fold since 2017, when it was one of the lowest of the region, from five murders per 100,000 inhabitants to 46 last year, surpassing Mexico, Colombia, and Brazil.

At the epicentre of the bloodletting are the country’s overcrowded prisons, which have become bases for criminal gangs. Over 400 inmates have been murdered in the last four years, while riots and jailbreaks are common.

Changing global demand for cocaine is one of the drivers of the crisis, with markets in Europe, Asia, and Brazil growing as consumption in the US wanes. That has led powerful cartels from Mexico to muscle in on Ecuador’s lightly policed shipping ports.

Ecuador’s descent into chaos has alarmed the region, especially neighbours Colombia and Peru. On Tuesday, the latter declared a state of emergency on its northern border with Ecuador and deployed an unspecified number of troops there. Colombia, which shares a porous border with Ecuador in its south, expressed concern about the security situation.

Advertisement
People trek through a muddy jungle
Ecuadoreans are fleeing north in record numbers, with Panama reporting that they are now the second-largest nationality after Venezuelans to traverse the Darién Gap — a dangerous tract of jungle © Luis Acosta/AFP/Getty Images

The crisis could have dramatic repercussions even further afield. Ecuadoreans are fleeing north in record numbers, with Panama reporting that they are now the second-largest nationality after Venezuelans to traverse the Darién Gap — a dangerous tract of jungle between Colombia and Panama that many migrants cross en route to the US.

Border security is likely to be a hot-button issue in the US election later this year. The Biden administration signalled it was paying close attention; Brian Nichols, the US assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere Affairs, condemned the violence and said that Washington was “ready to provide assistance”. A high-level delegation, including the leader of the US Southern Command, will visit Ecuador in coming weeks.

Ecuadoreans themselves are left to wonder how things came to such a painful pass. “This is a country that has always lived in peace,” says Rendón. “Lamentably that peace has been shattered and there is a lot of responsibility that goes around various administrations.”


The origins of Ecuador’s crime wave can be traced back in part to the policies of president Rafael Correa, a charismatic and combative leftist-nationalist who came to power in 2007 amid the so-called Pink Tide that saw socialists win office across Latin America.

During a decade as president, Correa brought the murder rate down to historic lows through a mixture of social spending that reduced poverty and boosted beat policing, and a policy allowing gangs to become legally recognised community groups by laying down their weapons.

But at the same time, he made Ecuadorean waters more attractive to smugglers by shutting a US naval base in the port city of Manta in the name of national sovereignty. The privatisation of ports along the Pacific further led to lax security on shipments.

Advertisement
A wanted poster for José Adolfo Macías Villamar, leader of the Los Choneros gang
A wanted poster for Adolfo ‘Fito’ Macías, leader of the Los Choneros gang © Ecuador’s Ministry of Interior/AP

“Correa did not believe it was primarily Ecuador’s responsibility as a transit country to police the flow of drugs in and out of its borders,” says Will Freeman, a fellow for Latin American studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. “But that’s not to say he’s the only figure with a share of the blame for the situation Ecuador is in.”

When Lenín Moreno, formerly Correa’s vice-president, took over in 2017, he used a referendum to overhaul the state apparatus built by his onetime mentor, disbanding the justice ministry but with it losing oversight of the country’s overcrowded prisons, Freeman says.

Meanwhile in Colombia, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc) — a Marxist guerrilla group that had long monopolised drug trafficking routes in northern Ecuador — agreed to demobilise in 2016, leaving behind fresh territory for local gangs to contest. 

An armoured personnel carrier drives down a city street
Soldiers patrol the streets of Quito after President Daniel Noboa declared a nationwide two-month state of emergency © Karen Toro/Reuters

And when the Covid-19 pandemic hit Ecuador in early 2020, ravaging the economies and public health of coastal port cities in particular, it rendered thousands of youths jobless and created ideal recruits for gangs surging in power and influence.

Membership in those gangs, including Los Choneros and Los Lobos, whose leader Fabricio Colón also escaped jail this week, is today estimated by some experts to number up to 50,000 people. With the agreements of Mexico’s Sinaloa and Nuevo Jalisco cartels, these Ecuadorean gangs have made themselves an integral part of the global narcotics supply chain.

They have also diversified, making money from extortion, kidnapping and illegal mining. Crucially, they have begun co-opting parts of the state, starting with its jails. Earlier this week government spokesperson Roberto Izurieta admitted that the prison system has “completely failed”.

As the gangs have expanded, security has deteriorated. Fernando Carrión, a security expert with Flacso, says they have become more brutal in their displays of violence since 2017. “In the last six years we’ve seen it get more violent, and today we see mutilations and dead bodies hanging from bridges.”

Advertisement
Line chart of Homicides per 100,000 population showing Ecuador’s murder rate has overtaken other Latin American countries

Moreno’s successor Guillermo Lasso, a self-made banking tycoon, was equally unable to halt the growing stranglehold of gangs when he took office in 2021. Failing to advance his agenda with an opposition party that shared power and grappling with social unrest and frequent prison riots, he dissolved congress in May last year to avoid an impeachment process he regarded as politically motivated, triggering snap elections.

It was that election cycle, featuring the shooting of Villavicencio by seven Colombian hitmen as he left a campaign rally — that dramatically laid bare how far Ecuador had fallen into the snare of the gangs.  

Villavicencio had previously reported being threatened by drug-trafficking groups including the Choneros, though authorities have not yet connected them to the assassination.

“Ecuador is practically submerged in organised crime,” Villavicencio told the FT in an interview three months before his death, promising to “declare war” on criminal economies if elected. “The war would combine a head-on fight in the streets, controlling the prisons, and isolating all the bosses of drug-trafficking groups.”


Today, it is Noboa who as president has declared a war on Ecuador’s gangs. In the decree signed on Tuesday, he declared that the country was living through an “internal armed conflict”, and designated 22 gangs — including Los Choneros and Los Lobos — as terrorist organisations.

“We are at war and we cannot back down in the face of these terrorist groups,” he said in an interview with local media on Wednesday.

Advertisement

Noboa is seeking to hold a referendum that would allow for the extradition of citizens accused of crimes abroad and the seizure of suspects’ assets, though the vote still requires approval from the country’s constitutional court.

A man in a blue suit sits in an ornate chair and is flanked by a soldier and the Ecuadorean flag
President Noboa has declared war on Ecuador’s gangs © Carlos Silva/Ecuador Presidency/Reuters

“Ecuador is living through an unprecedented crisis, and the government’s response to it is also unprecedented,” says Sebastián Hurtado, who runs Prófitas, a Quito-based political risk consultancy, in reference to Noboa’s declaration. “It provides Noboa with a political opportunity to push through reforms and win support for the referendum.”

Since Tuesday’s violence, the streets of Guayaquil have been quiet. Many shops remain shut, while schools are closed and classes are given virtually. Rubbish continues to pile up as refuse collectors, like most public sector workers, are ordered to stay home. In the sweltering city centre, which usually teems with commerce, soldiers patrol outside municipal buildings.

Locals say tensions are high. “No one is shopping right now,” says Johanna Guanoluisa, one of the few market vendors to have opened up shop in the central Bahia district of Guayaquil. “We’re scared because we know that if we open up, we could be robbed.”

Such fears are justified by sporadic outbreaks of violence across the country. In the Amazonian town of Coca, arsonists set a nightclub ablaze, killing two and injuring nine. Five bombings took place in Quito on Wednesday, causing property damage but no casualties. 

An aerial view of a prison complex
Turi prison in Cuenca. The country’s overcrowded jails have become bases for criminal gangs, with more than 158 prison guards and staff held hostage by inmates across seven prisons © AFP via Getty Images

Unions representing prison workers, over 158 of whom remain hostages in their own jails, have blasted the government for not providing information about their wellbeing as unverified videos circulate on social media of guards seemingly being tortured.

Rear Admiral Jaime Vela, the commander of the armed forces, told reporters on Wednesday evening that none of the hostages had been killed and that 329 people, mostly gang members, have been arrested since the state of emergency began on Monday.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Noboa’s tough rhetoric, reminiscent of El Salvador’s popular strongman leader Nayib Bukele — whose clampdown on gangs has won support across Latin America despite concerns of authoritarianism — seems to be resonating with Ecuadoreans tired of their country’s insecurity.

Noboa’s plan to wage war on the “terrorists” is “the only way we can get rid of all this crime,” says Mariuxi Paredes, a shopkeeper in downtown Guayaquil. “A dead dog won’t bite.”

Additional reporting by Christine Murray in Mexico City

News

Supreme Court reinstates Republican-favored Alabama congressional districts

Published

on

Supreme Court reinstates Republican-favored Alabama congressional districts

The U.S. Supreme Court

Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for Alabama to use a congressional district map favored by Republicans.

The court, in an unsigned order, overturned a three-judge district court panel that found that the map is “tainted by intentional race-based discrimination.” The court’s three liberals publicly dissented.

The ruling means that Alabama’s 2026 midterm elections will feature six Republican-leaning districts and one Democratic-leaning one, as opposed to a map with only five safe Republican seats. Democrat Shomari Figures, who represents Alabama’s Second District, will likely lose his seat as a result of the high court’s ruling.

Advertisement

The story of Alabama’s congressional map is long and tortured. It began in 2021, when the state implemented a new map to account for population changes in the census. The map featured only one majority-black district out of seven, even though the state is more than one-quarter Black.

Voters immediately sued, claiming the map illegally diluted minority votes in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution. Lower court judges agreed, ruling that the state must draw a map with two districts where Black voters have a realistic chance of electing their candidate of choice. The Supreme Court more than once has ordered Alabama to draw a compliant map.

But the state has refused and instead continued to litigate the case. On Tuesday, that tactic paid off.

What changed? In April, the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority all but gutted what remains of the Voting Rights Act, ruling that states cannot purposefully draw districts that are majority-minority.

Alabama then asked the high court to reinstate the state’s old map, under the theory that this new ruling meant that it was permissible to use a map with only one majority-Black district. In an unsigned, unexplained order in May, the high court essentially reversed its previous opinions, and allowed Alabama to use the old map for the upcoming midterm elections.

Advertisement

This set off a flurry of activity in Alabama. By the time the Supreme Court issued its May order, absentee balloting had already begun, using the court-drawn map. So Republican Governor Kay Ivey cancelled elections and scheduled a special primary for August for the affected congressional races.

The case, however, was not over.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court had ordered a lower court panel to continue evaluating Alabama’s map in light of its recent Voting Rights Act decision. And just 15 days after that order, the panel, composed of three Republican judges—two of them Trump appointees—concluded unanimously that even under the Supreme Court’s new standards, the plan for a single black district was “intentionally discriminatory.”

So, once again, Alabama returned to the Supreme Court, arguing that the map was partisan, not racially discriminatory. In short, that the Republican legislature simply drew the map to elect more Republicans. And that under the Supreme Court’s new interpretation of the Voting Rights Act, the GOP map should be allowed to stand.

The court’s conservative agreed, writing that the lower court “did not heed the presumption of legislative good faith.”

Advertisement

The court’s three liberals publicly dissented, castigating the conservative majority for failing to abide by its 2006 decision in the case of Purcell v. Gonzalez. That decision declared that courts should not change election rules too close to an election.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent, said the court “debases the democratic process” and “corrodes the rule of law by rewarding Alabama’s gamesmanship and outright defiance of court orders.”

Tuesday’s decision is the latest in a series of Supreme Court rulings that could well reshape the 2026 midterm elections, making it much harder for Democrats to prevail.

Continue Reading

News

Map: 3.7-Magnitude Earthquake Shakes the San Francisco Bay Area

Published

on

Map: 3.7-Magnitude Earthquake Shakes the San Francisco Bay Area

Advertisement

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

Advertisement

A minor, 3.7-magnitude earthquake struck in the San Francisco Bay Area on Tuesday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 9:44 a.m. Pacific time about 4 miles southeast of Cloverdale, Calif., data from the agency shows.

Advertisement

U.S.G.S. data earlier reported that the magnitude was 3.6.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Aftershocks detected

Subsequent quakes have been reported in the same area. Such temblors are typically aftershocks caused by minor adjustments along the portion of a fault that slipped at the time of the initial earthquake.

Advertisement

Quakes and aftershocks within 100 miles

Aftershocks can occur days, weeks or even years after the first earthquake. These events can be of equal or larger magnitude to the initial earthquake, and they can continue to affect already damaged locations.

Advertisement

When quakes and aftershocks occurred

 All times are Pacific time. The New York Times

Advertisement

Advertisement

Sources: United States Geological Survey (epicenter, aftershocks, shake intensity); LandScan via Oak Ridge National Laboratory (population density) | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Tuesday, June 2 at 12:59 p.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Tuesday, June 2 at 1:59 p.m. Eastern.

Continue Reading

News

Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security

Published

on

Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1.  Purpose.  The United States continues to lead the world in Artificial Intelligence (AI) because of the enormous talent and innovation of our AI industry, and because we refuse to stifle this innovation with overly burdensome regulation.  My Administration has unleashed tremendous technological growth and economic investment in AI by slashing the bureaucratic constraints that the prior administration placed on America’s AI developers and researchers, and by instead encouraging AI innovation and accelerating responsible AI adoption across government and industry. 

Advanced AI capabilities make our Nation stronger, but also introduce new national security considerations that require coordinated action across executive departments and agencies (agencies), and components.  As these capabilities evolve, my Administration will continue to work closely with industry to ensure that the best and most secure technology is deployed rapidly to confront any and all threats to our country.  We will continue to lead an America First cybersecurity effort that enhances both our national security and our global AI dominance.

It is the policy of the United States to promote AI innovation and security by working collaboratively with the private sector to modernize government and private sector information systems and harden them against external threats; to protect American ingenuity and intellectual property from exploitation and theft by adversaries; and to cultivate America’s advanced AI-enabled capabilities.

Sec. 2.  Upgrading American Systems for Advanced AI.  (a)  Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Committee on National Security Systems shall prioritize the cyber defense of National Security Systems, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3552(b)(6)(A), by taking appropriate and expeditious action consistent with the purpose of this order.

Advertisement

(b)  Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of War shall prioritize the cyber defense of Department of War information systems by taking appropriate and expeditious action consistent with the purpose of this order.

(c)  Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security, through the Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), in consultation with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, and the National Cyber Director, shall release Binding Operational Directives and other guidance as appropriate to:

(i)    expedite and prioritize the cyber defense of civilian Federal Government information systems in order to protect our Nation’s vital functions;

(ii)   establish or expand Federal programs and cybersecurity services that enhance AI-enabled defensive tools; and

(iii)  facilitate access to cybersecurity tools and services including, where appropriate, covered frontier models for agencies, State and local authorities, and operators of critical infrastructure such as rural hospitals, community banks, and local utilities.

Advertisement

(d)  Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the National Cyber Director, the Secretary of War, through the Director of the National Security Agency (NSA), and the Secretary of Homeland Security, through the Director of CISA, shall form an AI cybersecurity clearinghouse, in voluntary collaboration with the AI industry and operators of critical infrastructure, that coordinates and deconflicts scanning for software vulnerabilities, discovers and validates such vulnerabilities, and coordinates and prioritizes remediation and distribution of vulnerability patches.

(e)  Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Director of OMB, in coordination with the National Cyber Director and the Director of CISA, shall determine whether any Federal grant programs have available and relevant funding that can be directed toward applicants developing advanced AI vulnerability detection.

(f)  Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management shall expand the United States Tech Force Information Cybersecurity Specialist hiring and placement pathways.

Sec. 3.  Secure Frontier Model Deployment.  Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of War, through the Director of NSA, and the Secretary of Homeland Security, through the Director of CISA, in consultation with the White House Chief of Staff, through the National Cyber Director, the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology (APST), and the Secretary of Commerce, through the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and in coordination with other agencies, as appropriate, shall:

(a)  develop and maintain a classified benchmarking process to assess the advanced cyber capabilities of AI models and determine the threshold at which an AI model should be designated a “covered frontier model” for the purposes of this order, sharing such assessments with AI developers and researchers as appropriate.  Such a determination shall be made by the Director of NSA, in consultation with the National Cyber Director, the APST, the Director of CISA, and other representatives of the Department of War, as appropriate.

Advertisement

(b)  design a voluntary framework with AI developers through which developers would be able to:

(i)    engage the Federal Government to determine whether model(s) under development meet the designation of “covered frontier model”;

(ii)   provide the Federal Government with access to covered frontier models, subject to appropriate confidentiality, cybersecurity, insider-risk, and intellectual-property protection, use, and nondisclosure requirements, for a period of up to 30 days before they plan to release such models to other trusted partners; and 

(iii)  collaborate with the Federal Government to select trusted partners that will have early access to covered frontier models to promote secure innovation and strengthen the cybersecurity of critical infrastructure.

(c)  Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize the creation of a mandatory governmental licensing, preclearance, or permitting requirement for the development, publication, release, or distribution of new AI models, including frontier models.

Advertisement

Sec. 4.  Protection Against Criminal Actors.  The Attorney General shall prioritize the enforcement of 18 U.S.C. 1028, 18 U.S.C. 1030, 18 U.S.C. 1343, and all other applicable Federal criminal laws against anyone who utilizes AI to illegally access or damage a computer without authorization, or who utilizes AI while engaged in such illegal access to further any other crime.  This includes breaching any public or private information technology system, or employing AI agents to unlawfully access data or information that is subsequently used for a criminal or unlawful purpose.

Sec. 5.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

Advertisement

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d)  The costs for publication of this order shall be borne by the Department of War.

                             DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,

    June 2, 2026.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending