Inside the El Salvador prison where the US could send its own citizens

El Salvador’s Bold Offer to the US: A Look Inside the Controversial “Terrorism Confinement Center”

In a move that has sparked widespread intrigue and concern, El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele has offered to house U.S. citizen convicts within his country’s notorious “Terrorism Confinement Center.” This proposal, made in February 2025, has left many questioning the motivations behind it and why U.S. officials have not yet outright rejected the idea. Al Jazeera’s John Holman recently gained rare access to the prison, providing a glimpse into the harsh conditions and extreme measures taken by El Salvador’s government to combat crime.

The Notorious Prison: A Glimpse Inside

The “Terrorism Confinement Center,” often described as one of the most secure and restrictive prisons in the world, was opened in 2023 as part of Bukele’s aggressive campaign against gang violence. The facility is designed to hold members of notorious gangs like MS-13, who have terrorized communities not only in El Salvador but also in neighboring countries and the United States. John Holman’s report paints a stark picture of the prison’s environment, where inmates are held in tiny, barren cells with minimal access to light, food, and medical care. The conditions are so harsh that they have drawn condemnation from human rights organizations worldwide.

Why Would El Salvador’s President Make Such an Offer?

President Bukele’s decision to offer the U.S. the use of this maximum-security prison for its citizen convicts is a calculated move, rooted in both geopolitical strategy and domestic policy. For years, El Salvador has struggled with rampant gang violence, which has driven thousands of its citizens to flee to the U.S. as asylum seekers. By offering to take in U.S. prisoners, Bukele may be attempting to strengthen diplomatic ties with the U.S. while also signaling his commitment to combating crime on a hemisphere-wide scale. Additionally, housing foreign inmates could provide El Salvador with much-needed revenue, as the U.S. would likely cover the costs of incarceration.

Why Haven’t U.S. Officials Said No?

The U.S. government’s silence on Bukele’s offer is puzzling, given the ethical and legal implications of outsourcing prisoner detention to a facility notorious for human rights abuses. One possible explanation is that the U.S. is weighing the potential benefits of such an arrangement. With overcrowded prisons and rising incarceration costs, the idea of relocating certain inmates to a secure, low-cost facility could be tempting. Additionally, the U.S. may be hesitant to criticize Bukele’s administration openly, as El Salvador plays a critical role in regional efforts to combat illicit drug trafficking and illegal immigration.

The Implications of Accepting Such an Offer

If the U.S. were to accept Bukele’s proposal, the consequences would be far-reaching. From a legal standpoint, transferring U.S. citizens to a foreign prison raises questions about their rights and the ability of the U.S. to ensure their humane treatment. The “Terrorism Confinement Center” is known for its brutal conditions, including solitary confinement, inadequate medical care, and limited access to legal representation—all of which could lead to challenges in U.S. courts. Furthermore, such a move could set a dangerous precedent, encouraging other countries to follow suit and undermining the U.S.’s position as a global advocate for human rights.

A Broader Look at El Salvador’s Approach to Crime

Bukele’s offer must be viewed within the context of his broader approach to crime and governance. Since taking office in 2019, he has implemented a series of draconian measures aimed at curbing gang violence, including mass arrests, prolonged states of emergency, and the construction of mega-prisons like the “Terrorism Confinement Center.” While these tactics have led to a temporary drop in homicide rates, they have also drawn criticism for eroding democratic institutions and violating civil liberties. Bukele’s willingness to offer his prison to the U.S. is consistent with this hardline approach, one that prioritizes order and control over transparency and human rights.

Conclusion: A Decision with Far-Reaching Consequences

In the end, whether or not the U.S. accepts Bukele’s offer will depend on a complex interplay of political, legal, and ethical considerations. While the potential benefits of such an arrangement cannot be ignored, the moral and practical risks are significant. As the international community continues to grapple with the challenges of crime and punishment, El Salvador’s “Terrorism Confinement Center” serves as a stark reminder of the difficult trade-offs involved in the pursuit of security and justice.