The Coronavirus Challenge for Puerto Rico

In Brief

The Coronavirus Challenge for Puerto Rico

The coronavirus is delivering yet another heavy blow to natural disaster–prone Puerto Rico, threatening to deepen the U.S. territory’s economic and social crisis.

Puerto Rico’s government imposed a stringent lockdown that has helped curb the spread of the coronavirus thus far, but it has been slow to roll out widespread testing and contact tracing. Already, the pandemic has begun amplifying the U.S. territory’s long-running economic and social crisis.

How hard has the territory been hit?

A lab technician wearing a protective suit and gloves and a homeless person wearing a red bandana tied of their face under an overpass.
A lab technician takes blood from a homeless person for a coronavirus disease test in San Juan, Puerto Rico. Ricardo Arduengo/AFP/Getty Images

The coronavirus has infected more than two thousand people and killed over one hundred. Cases are expected to peak this month, but experts warn that more testing is needed to accurately assess the outbreak. Though Puerto Rico’s health system was underfunded and ill-equipped before the virus hit, it has thus far been able to manage the crisis. Nearly 80 percent of the territory’s ventilators are not being used, according to the Puerto Rico Department of Health.

More From Our Experts

Meanwhile, the economic toll has been heavy, costing up to $10 billion or roughly 10 percent of the territory’s gross domestic product (GDP), some experts say. The lucrative tourism sector has been hard-hit, and small businesses are failing. Meanwhile, unemployment has roughly quadrupled in recent months to an estimated 37 percent.

How has the territory’s government responded?

More on:

Puerto Rico

COVID-19

Economic Crises

Disasters

The Puerto Rican government’s response to the outbreak has received mixed reviews. Governor Wanda Vazquez declared a state of emergency on March 12, joining the leaders of most U.S. states and territories in doing so before the federal government. She then banned large gatherings and deployed the national guard to screen incoming travelers. The next day, officials confirmed Puerto Rico’s first coronavirus cases.

Among the last infected states or territories, Puerto Rico swiftly enforced one of the nation’s strictest lockdowns. Vazquez imposed a curfew and shuttered non essential businesses even before federal officials issued social-distancing guidelines. Though businesses could gradually reopen in coming weeks, a curfew will remain in place until at least May 25. Vazquez has also sought to limit travel to Puerto Rico, suspending cruises and requesting federal permission to block flights. U.S. officials approved the closure of airports except San Juan’s to commercial traffic.

Many experts credit Puerto Rico’s lockdown with protecting its fragile health system, but significant uncertainty about the coronavirus remains because the territory has lagged behind U.S. states in testing and tracing cases. As of early May, less than 1 percent of the population has undergone testing, about half the number needed to assess the outbreak. Moreover, officials initially overcounted positive results, echoing the government’s underestimation of Hurricane Maria’s death toll in 2017.

More From Our Experts

Vazquez’s administration has also faced corruption probes over a test-procurement contract and criticism following the discovery of much-needed medical equipment that had been abandoned after Hurricane Maria. Government shortcomings have prompted some local leaders to purchase tests, trace cases, and stockpile supplies themselves.

How has Washington helped?

Puerto Rico has received more than $2 billion through the federal Coronavirus Relief Fund, as well as via smaller payments earmarked for specific uses. This supplements the territory’s own $787 million stimulus package, which many view as insufficient. But many residents reportedly haven’t received their federal stimulus checks, and thousands of Puerto Rican nonprofits are ineligible for federal relief loans [PDF] because they aren’t registered with the Internal Revenue Service.

More on:

Puerto Rico

COVID-19

Economic Crises

Disasters

Some activists fear that coronavirus relief measures could be impeded by a control board Washington appointed several years ago to supervise Puerto Rico’s finances after the territory accrued massive debt. Vazquez has already faced questions from Congress about purchasing testing kits without consulting the board.

Why is Puerto Rico so vulnerable?

Puerto Rico is particularly at risk because the coronavirus is magnifying the territory’s multilayered economic and social crisis. The territory, which has a population of roughly 3.2 million, is suffering through a thirteen-year recession, largely driven by federal policies and territorial debt. By 2017, Puerto Rico owed $123 billion—118 percent of GDP. In recent years, it has also been battered by a string of hurricanes and earthquakes, which have further weakened its economy and health infrastructure.

The current economic downturn is aggravating decades of health-care underfunding by both territorial and federal governments. As a result, many hospitals are ill-equipped to confront a pandemic, although they appear to be managing the coronavirus caseload thus far. The territory has lost thousands of medical providers to emigration in recent years. Because many young people have moved away, the territory’s population is now older and more prone to health threats, such as the coronavirus. The median age of residents is forty-five, making Puerto Rico’s the second-oldest population in Latin America, below only Martinique.

Creative Commons
Creative Commons: Some rights reserved.
Close
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License.
View License Detail
Close

Top Stories on CFR

Trade

President Trump doubled almost all aluminum and steel import tariffs, seeking to curb China’s growing dominance in global trade. These six charts show the tariffs’ potential economic effects.

Ukraine

The Sanctioning Russia Act would impose history’s highest tariffs and tank the global economy. Congress needs a better approach, one that strengthens existing sanctions and adds new measures the current bill ignores.

China Strategy Initiative

At the Shangri-La dialogue in Singapore last week, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said that the United States would be expanding its defense partnership with India. His statement was in line with U.S. policy over the last two decades, which, irrespective of the party in power, has sought to cultivate India as a serious defense partner. The U.S.-India defense partnership has come a long way. Beginning in 2001, the United States and India moved from little defense cooperation or coordination to significant gestures that would lay the foundation of the robust defense partnership that exists today—such as India offering access to its facilities after 9/11 to help the United States launch operations in Afghanistan or the 123 Agreement in 2005 that paved the way for civil nuclear cooperation between the two countries. In the United States, there is bipartisan agreement that a strong defense partnership with India is vital for its Indo-Pacific strategy and containing China. In India, too, there is broad political support for its strategic partnership with the United States given its immense wariness about its fractious border relationship with China. Consequently, the U.S.-India bilateral relationship has heavily emphasized security, with even trade tilting toward defense goods. Despite the massive changes to the relationship in the last few years, and both countries’ desire to develop ever-closer defense ties, differences between the United States and India remain. A significant part of this has to do with the differing norms that underpin the defense interests of each country. The following Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) memos by defense experts in three countries are part of a larger CFR project assessing India’s approach to the international order in different areas, and illustrate India’s positions on important defense issues—military operationalization, cooperation in space, and export controls—and how they differ with respect to the United States and its allies. Sameer Lalwani (Washington, DC) argues that the two countries differ in their thinking about deterrence, and that this is evident in three categories crucial to defense: capability, geography, and interoperability. When it comes to increasing material capabilities, for example, India prioritizes domestic economic development, including developing indigenous capabilities (i.e., its domestic defense-industrial sector). With regard to geography, for example, the United States and its Western allies think of crises, such as Ukraine, in terms of global domino effects; India, in contrast, thinks regionally, and confines itself to the effects on its neighborhood and borders (and, as the recent crisis with Pakistan shows, India continues to face threats on its border, widening the geographic divergence with the United States). And India’s commitment to strategic autonomy means the two countries remain far apart on the kind of interoperability required by modern military operations. Yet there is also reason for optimism about the relationship as those differences are largely surmountable. Dimitrios Stroikos (London) argues that India’s space policy has shifted from prioritizing socioeconomic development to pursuing both national security and prestige. While it is party to all five UN space treaties that govern outer space and converges with the United States on many issues in the civil, commercial, and military domains of space, India is careful with regard to some norms. It favors, for example, bilateral initiatives over multilateral, and the inclusion of Global South countries in institutions that it believes to be dominated by the West. Konark Bhandari (New Delhi) argues that India’s stance on export controls is evolving. It has signed three of the four major international export control regimes, but it has to consistently contend with the cost of complying, particularly as the United States is increasingly and unilaterally imposing export control measures both inside and outside of those regimes. When it comes to export controls, India prefers trade agreements with select nations, prizes its strategic autonomy (which includes relations with Russia and China through institutions such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the BRICS), and prioritizes its domestic development. Furthermore, given President Donald Trump’s focus on bilateral trade, the two countries’ differences will need to be worked out if future tech cooperation is to be realized.