Crossing the border: reflections about nowadays migratory issues
Since the second half of the twentieth century, migratory problems have been part of the key political agenda in the international relations between Mexico, United States and Canada. In search for better living conditions, groups of Mexican migrants have crossed the Rio Grande or the deserts of Mexican-American border to reach the United States, what have caused rising tensions between Mexican and American governments. On the other hand, middle-class families and students from Mexico are traveling to Canada after new migratory policies in this country. Since 2000, Canadian enterprises and universities have opened opportunities to work and study in this country for a five year term.
To have an accurate criteria in the analysis of the contemporary problems of North America, it is important to consider the different migratory movements between Mexico, Canada and the United States, taking into account problems as the need of a new migratory policy, the possible consequences of the electoral results in the United States in what matters to migration, and upcoming possible political problems, involving migratory issues.
A conceptual approximation to migration issues
Definitions of migrating, emigrating and immigrating:
Migration can be defined as “the displacement of a person or group, who leave their place or birth or residence, in order to establish in another place, for the purpose of taking up permanent or semipermanent residency.[1]” Permanent residence refers to those cases in which those ones who migrate do not pretend to re-migrate after establishing in a determined geographical area. Semipermanent residence, on the other hand, is a term that designates those cases in which the migrants do not establish plenty in the arrival area, because they know they are going to be forced, by any kind of circumstance, to move again. An example of permanent migration is the one of the political exiled that are forced to move by their local governments, and who have forbidden to return to their origin country; meanwhile, an example of a semipermanent migration is the one of the seasonal migratory movements of farmers, who are forced to leave their homes because of environmental affection, erosion, or natural diseases.
Conceptually, there are three different parts involved in the migratory phenomena: a) the migrant (the person who moves from a place into another), b) the sender country (the area that leaves the migrant), and c) the receiver country (the new place where the migrant pretends to live in). Besides, the migratory action can be conceived as two different events according to the nature and direction of the movement: Emigration, that is the process by which the migrant lives his origin country and takes a trip to his predetermined destiny; and Immigration, that is the process of establishment into the arrival country, and becoming part of its political, social, cultural and economic life. Why do people emigrate or immigrate? There are lots of reasons to enlist, but the most important, according to the UNESCO[2], are: environmental (disasters, health diseases, abrupt climate changes), political (war, exile), economic (working opportunities, per capita income, level of life standards), or cultural (religious freedom, education) issues. Where these reasons are problems or local disasters that force emigrating, they are known as push factors (low security standards, food shortage, a flood), and where they are advantages of a certain area, or opportunities to establish in a new place, they are called pull factors (nicer climate conditions, better food supply centers, political freedom, religious respect).
In order to classify the different types of emigrants and immigrants, the United Nations databank[3] provides the following different tittles, according to the circumstance of the migratory movement:
a) Voluntary immigrants or emigrants: are those who move to look for better life conditions according to economical, sociopolitical, or cultural standards, and represent the 73% of world migrants.
b) Refugees: people who are residing out of their origin country, due to the fear of attack, persecution or discrimination, because of race, religion, nationality, or membership in a particular social group or political preferences. Most of the case, these migrants must be politically accepted by the receiver country, and also adapt their sociopolitical identity to the one of their new homeplace (22% of international migrants).
d) International Displaced Person (IDP): a person who is forced to leave his or her home region because of environmental, military or political unfavorable conditions, such as army raids. Most of the cases of displacement, these migrants do not cross international borders, because their local governments reubicate them in domestic new spaces (represent 5% of international migrants).
e) Migration stream or displaced community: a group involved in what it is called a collective migration or exodus. It is the movement of an entire community (or even nation), from one geographic circumscription to another, due to invasion, political opposition, war or environmental disaster. An example of this is the emigration of the Jewish international community to the State of Israel, during 1946.
According to United Nations Population Division[4], the different types of migratory movements that can be enlisted, legitimated by the international law, are: the inter-country migration, the outer-country migration, inter-continental migration, intra-continental migration, population massive transfer (those of displaced communities, impelled migration, when it is decreed by international organisms or governments, like in the case of exiles, step migration, when a person establishes semipermanently in an area between his origin place and his preplanned destiny; like the case of Guatemalan or Salvadorian that, pretending to cross to the United States, live in Mexico temporarily, chain migration, when a lot of people from a common group migrate in different individual movements from a country to another (like the case of the Cubans going to Miami from 1983 to nowadays), return migration, that occurs when emigrants return to their original homeplaces, and seasonal migrations, semipermanent movements due to a specific climatic season.
Receiver and sender countries in North America: a problematic history
The history of migratory movements between two or more neighboring countries is closely related to the history of the borders and bilateral relations between these involved countries. Migratory issues involve, not only a sociopolitical or geopolitical contemporary problem; also, they represent an international regime to study, analyze, and determine different policy making processes. To understand the migratory movements in North America, it is necessary to get back since the middle-nineteenth century, when after the Mexican-American War (1846-1848) authorities of both Mexican and American governments, decided to sign the Guadalupe-Hidalgo Treaty, which stipulated that Mexico would loose the territory of the actual states of California, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico and parts of Wyoming, Utah and Nevada. After this document was proclaimed, 84 million of Mexicans were recognized as American citizens and started to conform the first Spanish-speaking community of the United States, which nowadays extends to over 10 million of people, just in the southern states of the American Union. After the Civil War in the United States, particularly during the period 1870-1890, the United States and Mexico approved the Ley Consular de Libre Trabajo México-Estados Unidos (1871), in Mexico city; a law which established that any Mexican who wanted to emigrate to the United States, could do it freely for a five year term, in order to help this country with its reconstruction process. Lots of Mexicans used to work during these days in building railroad lines, construction and agriculture, from Kansas to Missouri. The problem became that, from 1890 to 1904, most of the temporary Mexican residents in the United States disobeyed the law and stayed living illegally in the Southern area of the country. After this, the American government had no other choice than ensure the borders of the country.In 1902, the Security Border Patrol was established and also 35 migratory customs surrounding the border line. “Since the two first decades of the twentieth century, the migratory flux from Mexicans into the United States depends upon the handwork offer and supply mechanisms. America knows that Mexicans are cheap handworkers, and Mexicans know America is the land of opportunities.[5]”
Along the bilateral Mexican-American relations history, is important to point out that the United States has been, predominantly, a receiver country in terms of migration, and that Mexico has been a sender country. The co-dependent relationship of both in what concerns to economy countries turned problematic since the first massive migratory fluxes of Mexicans into the United States. Almost 52% of Mexican global economic rates depend upon the money remittances sent by the workers residing in the United States, and almost 33% of the local economies of Florida and California rely on Mexican workers who specialize in agriculture, construction and domestic issues[6]. Every year, the United States receive from 20, 000 to 25, 000 Mexican illegal immigrants (calculated since 2000), from which the 52% are men, and 48% are women, and that include 1, 300 to 1, 700 kids under the 17 years old. There are no considerable migrating fluxes from the United States into Mexico; nevertheless, there are Mexican communities who have hosted high indexes of Americans, such as Los Cabos and Rosarito, in Baja California, Cancun in Quintana Roo, and San Miguel de Allende in Guanajuato. In all these cases, the American residents in Mexico are legal immigrants who buy properties, manage local investments and can return freely in anytime to their origin country.
Canada migratory movements to the United States started formerly during the decade of the fifties, due to the success of the American economy after the World War II, and the job opportunities in this country. According to Globerman[7], the most important contemporary movements of Canadians to the south neighboring country are the ones that can be enlisted during the periods 1946-1959, 1966-1968, and 1971-1976. In what concerns to North American geopolitics, Canada is a sender country whose people go often into the United States, but can be also seen as a minor receiver country for those Mexicans that get the opportunity to work and study in this country. There is no considerable emigration from the United States into Canada, but on the other hand, the Canadian territory is a major receiver of European immigrants since the end of World War II (1946, specifically), and for Asian students in college years. According to the Globerman study, the 27% of the foreign residents in Canada come from New Zealand, England, France and the Netherlands, 39% come from Asian Countries (India, Turkey, Taiwan, Japan, the Koreas), and only 11% are Latin Americans. The less considerable percentage (9%), are those ones who come from the EnglishCaribbeanIslands, Africa and Australia.
The borders and its vulnerability
The border between Mexico and the United States is (circa) 3125 kilometers long, and extends towards the Grande or Bravo River, which separates the Mexican states of Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Nuevo León, Coahuila and Tamaulipas, from the American states of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. Surrounding the border, live near 12 million of Mexicans, and near 10 million of Americans; the combination of the population of all these territories, ascend to 77 million people. In the side of the United States, the border surrounds 25 different counties, and in the Mexican side, it rounds 32 different municipalities[8]. The main points to cross from Mexico to the United States illegally, according to these geographical subscriptions are the Mexican towns of Naco, Altar, Tecate and Nogales, in Sonora, Tijuana, in Baja California, and Agua Prieta, Ciudad Miguel Alemán, Reynosa and Camargo, in Coahuila.
The main problems that face this border are, that the Mexican military stop places, the offices of the Beta Group (a Mexican police group that detents the Central and South American migrants that try to cross to the United States) and even the Border Patrol units (more than 1,100 pick up vans), are not “sufficient” to stop the migratory fluxes of Mexicans who try to pass to the United States. Besides, the emigrants face terrible geographic aggravating issues while pretending to cross. The desert of Sasabe, located between Altar and Phoenix, is one of the most extremely hot ones at day and coldest at night. According to the Mexican Instituto Nacional de Migración (National Migration Institute), of 8000 emigrants who pretend crossing the border, 320 die in the dessert of starving, lack of water or temperature changes.
The United States-Canadian border, officially known as the International Border, is the longest common border in the world with an extension of 8,891 km. According to the Canadian Migration Policy Institute, there are more than 300 strategic points to cross illegally from Canada to the United States and vice versa, but in difference to the Mexican-American border, the one who separates Canada from the United States has not a strength policy of vigilance nor observation. The area is just surrounded by offices of the International Boundary Commission, and several policemen units. Nevertheless, after the terrorist attacks of September 11th,2001 in the United States, the security had to be enforced in this common area. Since then, a military retain point was located in Point Roberts, Washington, to stop possible illegal crossers.
Trilateral problems and solutions
What does the United States consider as illegal migration, according to its law codes?
Since the decade of 1920, the United States declared “illegal immigration” as part of his federal penal code, after discovering that the Irish and Mexican residents in this country, where “faking an estate of indigence, but becoming part of the everyday economic life of the country[9]”. What is considered as illegal ingression in this country is, according to the law: “an irruption into the secure sea or continental border without any permission allowed by the United States government.[10]” The United States Department of State, determine three different ways to become considered as an illegal immigrant: a) entering without authorization or inspection, b) staying beyond an authorized period after legal entry, or c) by violating terms of legal entry. There are three different federal codes that penalize illegal immigration: American Citizenship and Immigration Services Law, Immigration and Nationality Act (included in the constitution), and the State Department International Law. In all these documents, all illegal people who introduce the American territory are considered as aliens. “An illegal immigrant is just an alien that is not detected in time and that has avoided the legal terms and American protective standards, to become a permanent resident.[11]”
According to the United States Department of State, 57% of the resident illegal immigrants in the United States are Mexican (5,790,000 illegal residents, with an increasing rate of population of 1.2% per year), 24% are Central American and South American, 9% are Canadian, 6% are Asiatic, and just 2% come from the rest of the world. According to the PewHispanicCenter, the number of Mexican immigrants will tend to decrease with the actual American crisis. It is estimated that over a million and a half of Mexican immigrants in America will leave the country during 2009[12]. From those who enter the United States legally, those who get a Non-Stayer Visa (tourist Visa) and later stay in the country, are around the 4 and the 5.5 millions, the Border Crosser Card Violators[13], are calculated in 200,000 up to 250,000 millions, and those who cross the border without any document, are calculated in 7 up to 9 million. Every year, the American border is crossed 12 million times, from which 1.5 million of the crosses are performed by illegal Mexican immigrants. The Mexican states that export the highest rates of illegal workers are: Guanajuato, Jalisco, Oaxaca, Veracruz, Estado de México and Puebla. The undocumented workers in America receive as a whole every year almost 85 billion dollars, from which 50 billions are exported to Mexico as remittances. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the enterprises spend 7 billion dollars in maintaining the social security of the illegal Mexican workers in America, and using the statistics of United States Institute of Immigration and Naturalization (IIN), we estimated that in order to maintain the education of undocumented public students and the born-American sons of illegal immigrants in public schools, the United States government needs 2.8 billion dollars each year.[14]
What does the law of the United States government allow to do with illegal immigrants and residents? For many minor crimes, especially crimes involving juveniles, those who are apprehended are not arrested. And only a fraction of those who are arrested are ever brought to the courts for disposition. The problem with illegal immigrant criminals is that they cannot be judged as American residents, and in the other hand, if they are judged as illegal immigrants, their punishment would not be as coercitive as if they would have been processed for the crime they committed. Many illegal immigrants who are apprehended by Border Patrol agents are voluntarily returned to their home countries (deportation) and are not ordinarily tabulated in national crime statistics. If immigrants, whether illegal or legal, are apprehended entering the United States, they are usually charged under federal statutes and, if convicted, are sent to federal prisons. Throughout this entire process, immigrants may have a chance of deportation, if they get protection by the Mexican consulate, which commit with the American government to punish these infractions, after sending them to Mexican territory. On the last year, almost 300,000 illegal immigrants have been detent and 310,000 deportations, according to the registers of the Executive Office for the Immigration Review[15]. Besides, most of the deported, according to the same source, had a former family in the United States, what implied disintegration and tragedy. Almost 13,000 born-American kids from Mexican parents had to be taken to public orphan houses after the deportation of their parents.
One of the most famous way to infract American Law in what relates to migration is to use a false Social Security Card in order to be recruited by a recognized company, and to get a payroll, which can be used later to get other documents such as a health insurance applications. Some of the most famous cases of companies in which were working more than 1,500 illegal immigrants with false documents are the ones of Wal Mart, who had to pay a bill of 11 million dollars because of complicity to the American Court, the meat-processing company Swift and Co., and Tyson Foods, whose most illegal workers were under 21 years old.
Even some establish that the large amount of illegal residents in the United States is a consequence to ineffective migratory policies and a loose enforcement of the southern border, others such as Eduardo González, author of Con todo y triques: Crónicas de Migración México-Estados Unidos, establish that the real reason why the United States government allow illegal immigration is because of the effectiveness of the Mexican and Latin American workers in American industries. Besides, they do not stand for high wages or particular labor rights; they do not apply for special insurance programs, nor demand working fairs or inter-workers share programs. “They do, as Vicente Fox would say during 2001, the job that even the black people in America do not want to do.[16]” George Grayson, emeritus professor of the College of Joseph and Mary in Virginia, declared according to the illegal workers in America:
(…) the public approval of the illegal residents in the United States is still polarized. While the large companies and the high class families have to be thankful to them for the excellent work they do in maintaining the optimums economic rates in America, the middle and por classes want them to return home, because they say they are gaining the wages they need and occupying the corporative spaces that are reserved for legal Americans.[17]
Mexican-American main migratory policies from the XXth to the XXIst centuries
The most important treaties celebrated between Mexican and American governments in what respects to bilateral migratory policies, are the following:
Date:
Policy:
1929-1933
After the economic recession of 1929, the United States government enforces his national security and guarantees the job opportunities to American citizens.Around 400 000 Mexican immigrants whom were faking to be legal workers for the railroad, steel and coal companies, are deported back to Mexico.
1940-1946
Starts the Programa Brasero de los Trabajadores Agrícolas, a social program to authorize the legal immigration Fromm Mexican peasants into United States for a seven year term. The temporary residence Visa (“green card”) starts being implemented. In 1943, also starts a program to legalize the railroad construction Mexican workers in the United States.
1951-1952
The Programa Brasero turns to be successful, but the United States government starts implementing policies to avoid the documentary falsification and the illegal immigration. The “Texas Proviso” is implemented, a commission whose function will be to check the papers of the Mexican resident workers in Texas.
1954
The Programa Brasero ends. Most of Mexican participating peasants and industrial laborers start being deported in mass, others, escape and establish themselves in the United States, starting families and naturalizing their children. The United States government implements the “Wet Back Program”, a policy of the Border Patrol to deport immediately any illegal immigrant.
1964
The Programa Brasero is not renewed. Since this year, there has not been another bilateral migratory plan between Mexico and the United States.
1970-1980
The Congress of the United States includes in the constitution the prohibition of illegal immigration, which forbids Canadian and Mexican “aliens” the incursion to American territory.
1980-1981
The Law of International Migration Reform (LIMR) is approved by the United States congressmen and officially implemented in 1986. It punishes with substantial bills to those companies or bosses who include illegal workers as part of their worker lists. Mexico asks to the United States to implement a special consulate in Washington. The Ascension Commission is formed; a common United States and Mexican governments forum, in order to decide the future of illegal Mexican residents in the United States.
1990-1999
Mexico, the United States and Canada sign the NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), but this does not allow the participant countries to accept the free flux of workers through the three countries. Mexican Congress passes the “Ley de no-pérdida de la nacionalidad mexicana”, which establishes that a son of Mexicans born in the United States can be both Mexican and American. Besides, the Instituto Nacional de Migración implements the “Programa Paisano”, which consists on economic and moral support to those Mexican workers in the United States that want to get back to his homeplaces to visit their families.
2000-2008
The money remittances from the Mexican workers in the United States become more important then any other Mexican import (more than 550 billion dollars, more than the tourism national income). The Mexican government implements the “Law for the Vote of the Mexicans residing in a foreign country”, that allow the Mexican workers in the United States to vote in their country’s democratic processes.
The migratory policies of Canada and Mexico related to human movements in North America
The policy making process of Canadian government in what refers to migratory movements concerns to its Migration Policy Institute[18] (MPI), which was founded in 2001 by Demetrius Papadimitriou and that emits every year an evaluative document about the main problems and policies related to migration. In the edition of 2002, the MPI declared Canada was the third country in the world in giving social asylum and accepting international refugees from conflict areas, such as Bosnia, Kosovo or the Islamic Asian pre-soviet countries (the Refugee Protection Act, of 2001), and that the country wanted to make a free-border-trade and migratory agreement with the United States for 2004. “There are 317 different official land, air and sea points of entry to the United States from Canada, 14 customs and 79 different ports. We need to purpose legal vigilance and political observation, instead of allowing in these points, narcotrafic and illegal immigration and merchandising flows.” The purpose of Canada was to establish a common Mexico-United States-Canada Visa in order to cross legally by the airports and seaports; after the September 11th attacks in the United States, the American government derogated this proposal, justifying that this would be dangerous for the security of its country. On the other hand, the most effective Mexican contemporary policies related to migrating movements, are:
a) It plans to produce 70,000 maps marking main roads and water tanks for people wanting to cross illegally into the US. Mauricio Farah of Mexico's Human Rights Commission, declared: “the only thing we are trying to do is warn them of the risks they face and where to get water, so they won't die.[19]” Russ Knocker, a spokesman for US Homeland Security said maps would not improve safety for those trying to cross the border, "It is not helpful for anyone, no matter how well intended they might be, to produce road maps that lead aliens into the desolate and dangerous areas along the border, and potentially invite criminal activity, human exploitation and personal risk”[20]. In response to the growing concern over these immigrant deaths, the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) launched "Operation Lifesaver", which consists in using patrol flights and search-and-rescue missions to find migrants in distress.
b) The Yucatan government also started producing educational materials (a handbook and a DVD) about the risks and implications of crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. According to some groups, this guide tells immigrants where to find health care, how to get their kids into United States schools, and how to send money home. Sara Zapata Mijares of the Los Angeles Yucatecan Club said during the presentation of this program in 2006 that illegal immigration is a reality and also, the guide is a necessity to save lives. Ira Mehlman of the Federation for American Immigration Reform said as a response, "This is really the way they keep their corrupt system afloat, by sending their excess workers to the United States and getting billions of dollars in remittances every year (…) so for them this is a worthwhile investment"[21].
d) Matrícula Consular (Consular Register) identification cards: an identification card issued by the Government of Mexico through its consulate offices in the United States (New York, Texas, Washington). The purpose of the card is to demonstrate that the bearer is a Mexican national living outside of Mexico, which is protected by the individual guarantees of the Mexican Constitution (arts. 1st to 29th).
The migratory nowadays scenario
Migration and North America Free Trade Agreement (1994-1995):
The United States, Mexico and Canada, share something more than just their borders. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was implemented in January, 1994, creating one of the largest free trade areas of the world. However, economic integration has not been the only thing that bonds these three countries. These countries have now “established common policies related to trade, border security, migration and other issues” [22]
The North American Free Trade Agreement, (NAFTA) was supposed to be the “magic treaty” that could take care of immigration. NAFTA was enacted by American Congress fourteen years ago, making an attractive promise to the participant countries (mainly US and Mexico): “the agreement would reduce illegal immigration from Mexico”[23]. By NAFTA, Mexicans would enjoy the prosperity, and the high employment rate that a strategic alliance with the United States and Canada would generate. Nevertheless, the reality became something very different. Nowadays, the number of illegal immigrants has only increased, the labor conditions of Mexican “maquiladoras” (textile industries), that were supposed to be supported by the United States government became worse than the way they were before 1994-1995, and the idea of the negotiation of a new migratory policy became only part of the whole myth.
When NAFTA was originally conceived during 1989 by the first meetings between Mexican president Carlos Salinas de Gortari, the American leader, George Bush and the Canadian Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney, American investment was supposed to grow rapidly in Mexico, and the Mexican government was supposed to create a new employment infrastructure in order to become a less “risky” country to invest in. Mexican government was supposed to build roads, schools, sanitation services and other public needs, in order to help these new American industries to set up, throughout the country. During 1995-1998, the Salinas administration guaranteed President Clinton that these improvements in his country would position Mexico into the developed countries´ economic scenario, but “it just did not happen”[24] Gary Hufbauer, professor of the Peter G. Peterson institute for International Economics in Washington said: “this (the lack of effectiveness of Mexican policies in what related to social development) caused the congregation of the factories in the north of our country (United States), while the original promise was to establish job opportunities surrounding 300 miles of the American border, where some infrastructure already existed (as the textile factories of Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua)”[25].
NAFTA was supposed to create more jobs in Mexico, to raise the salaries, which eventually will lead to a reduction in the illegal migration of the Mexicans to the United States, but at the end, this was not what really happened. It is known that NAFTA was not the only measure that affected the Mexican economy during the nineties, but also, it was not precisely a benefit for years of terrible economic crisis (1994-1995) in Mexico. Besides, after the political instability period, known as the “error de diciembre” (the crack of December), most of the American investors who had supported Mexico went away, closing the opportunity of a bilateral new agreement in what concerned to policy, and also, affecting seriously Mexican current account rates, which were determinant for the local workers to consider the idea of staying or traveling for better job opportunities.
The pretension to establish a new migratory policy and its failure (2000-2001)
During the government of Mexican president Vicente Fox, he pushed for negotiations with the United States, in order to make an immigration reform, which included in its changes to the post-1994 migratory policy, a solution to the problem of illegal incursion into the American territory. The Fox’s administration called this problem “The Whole Enchilada”. The negotiations hoped to legalize all the illegal Mexican immigrants that were on the United States living and working already, and potentially end the diseases on the border, by implementing working bilateral plans of legal temporary immigration. The title Fox and his Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jorge Castañeda gave to this new proposal was Guest Worker Plan. Castañeda commented about the plan: “the best thing that can happen to both our countries is to have an orderly flow, a controlled flow of migration to the United States (…) Mexicans contribute enormously to the US economy, to US competitiveness” [26]. The reform was supported by President George W. Bush during 1999-2000, and even approved by the Senate; later, it was rejected by the House of Representatives. The reason the senators gave to the rejection was, that they had a more important bill involved with migratory policy to approve, the Border Initiative, which purposed to ensure the main points of ingression of the border by more elements of the National Security Department. The FBI, according to the Border Initiative, stated: “it would build new fences along the border with Mexico, toughen immigration controls, and make it a federal crime to offer services or assistance to illegal immigrants”[27].
Instead of reaching what the administration of Fox wanted, and besides approving the original Border Initiative, the United States Senate implemented an immigration reform that said: “those who have been in the United States between two and five years would have to return to their home country briefly, but they would be allowed then to re-enter as temporary workers; those ones who have had a residence of more than ten years, can apply for citizenship”[28]. This response of the United States government was not very satisfactory to the Mexican government, because they have been pushing for a bilateral free-migration agreement since a while ago. Karina Arias, the coordinator for liaison and promotion of the Mexican non-governmental organization “Sin Fronteras”, said about the new American policy that forced the illegal immigrants to return home: “(…) there is still a long road to walk, because that (a free-migration bilateral agreement) would not solve the migration problems. Anyway, we will be pushing to get a bill of rights of the immigrant in the United States.” The topic generated a lot of polemic. Some Americans, as the governor of California, the ex actor Arnold Swarzcheneger, declared publicly his opposition to a migratory reform; on the other hand, the manifestations of Cubans, Central Americans, Venezuelans and Mexicans invaded the American streets claiming for a new policy in order to return to their homeplaces and re-enter again to the United States. The tensions increased until the terrorist attacks of 2001 arrived to New York. Later on, by considering the pretext of a new “fighting against the terrorism national security doctrine”, Condoleezza Rice and George Bush declared that any topic involved with migration would not be a priority anymore to the American Senate, until a new advertising of re-negotiating the issue.
The wall on the Mexican-US border
The border that separates the United States and Mexico actually has barriers that prevent the illegal immigration, such as Border Patrol units and commercial customs. According to the National Commission of Human Rights of Mexico, there have been five thousand migrant deaths along the border that separates Mexico from the United States, during the last thirteen years.
In 2006, the United States Congress authorized the Secure Fence Act, which was a planned to build thousands of miles of fence all along the southern border of the United States in order to stop the flow of illegal Mexicans and to provide also, security from the terrorism threat, which was an imminent menace after 2001. The United States argued that the bill’s main purpose was to protect the citizens of the United States, “It is an important step toward immigration reform. Ours is a nation of immigrants. We are also a nation of law. Unfortunately, the United States has not been in complete control of its borders for decades and, therefore, illegal immigration has been on the rise”[29], argued President George Bush in a public discourse. Obviously, the Mexican government got very angry about a new wall that would separate physically Mexico from the United States. Vicente Fox even “denounced the U.S. measures, passed by the House of Representatives on Friday (December the 15th, 2006), as shameful. His foreign secretary, Luis Ernesto Derbez, echoed his complaints”[30]. Derbez Bautista argued that Mexico was not going to allow that such a thing was done, because it was a violation to the emigrants´ human rights and a lack of respect to Mexican sovereignty, but as we all know, it just did not happen. The citizens of Mexico expected more reaction from the government; they wanted the President to confront United States, to fight for the dignification of Mexican residents in the United States, but president Fox could not oppose openly to Bush’s policy after his military consign of attacking any kind of international threat with no mercy.
Finally, not only a fence crossed the border. The United States built a wall made of concrete, which since then, has been a nightmare for the people that live in the border and cross it often.
Investments in Canada for immigrate to work and study
Canadian immigration policies, since the 1967, consisted on an open ideology that allowed immigrants to Canada to “be chosen on the basis of suitability to Canada and the Canadian labor market needs and to mitigate any discrimination owing religion, race or country of origin”[31]. This policy was known as a liberal immigration doctrine, but after some years it changed, enforcing the local borders a little bit. In 1978, the Canadian Senate adopted a more “restrictive policy”, due to the local problems the country faced with the separatism pretension of the Québécois blocks[32]. Nevertheless, nowadays, the business immigration purposed by Canadian government and its programs of scholarships which purpose a new internationalization of local colleges, is turning the local migratory policy from the “restrictive” doctrine to a more open and cooperative policy. The business immigration policies in Canada, divide the foreign investment movement in three different categories: “the entrepreneur, the investor, and the self-employment”[33]. The entrepreneur was a person who owned, operated or controlled an enterprise and who wanted to immigrate to Canada to establish a new business that could create jobs locally. The investor program, was established in order to allow foreign investors -“who themselves had been successful in amassing a net worth of at least $500,000”[34]- to go to Canada in order to manage local business or arranging the positioning of important foreign brands. It is important to point out that Quebec has its own policy in what respects to the money that enters into the capital account of the country, so its local migratory and investing policy is not still as open as the one in the rest of Canada. The self-employers, as the last stage of the business migratory policy, are seen as the ones who establish their own small businesses in Canada or look for a job in a Canadian or foreign company. The requirement to accept self-employers is that any plan of these would be a contribution to Canada culturally, economically and socially. In order to be accepted as legal immigrants by Canadian government, immigrants have to present a document with a serious proposal and a resume. According to the Ministery of Foreign Affairs and International Commerce of Canada, the business migratory policies are reserved to “qualified employments in designated occupations”[35]. The main requirement that the Visa Office asks for is: “immigrants must determine that the employment will not take jobs from Canadians an that the employment must be such that it offers continuity, standards and conditions sufficient to attract and retain Canadian Citizens and permanent residents”.[36]
References:
·The Human Migration Guide, at National Geographic Magazine “Xpeditions 6”, in:
Imaz, Bayona, Cecilia, La nación mexicana trasfronteras: Impactos sociopolíticos en México de la migración a los Estados Unidos, Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales, UNAM, 2005.
Chambers, Lain, Migración, cultura e identidad, Amorrurtu Editores, Buenos Aires, 1995.
Censo Fronterizo Poblacional, 2004, Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática, INEGI.
Irene y Mercado, Leticia, Migración, decisión involuntaria, Instituto Nacional Indigenista, Mexico, 1995.
Mary E. Williams, Immigration, United States Department of State Notebooks, Philadelphia, 2003.
See the entire report atwww.foxnews.com- MexicanState Issues 'How To' on Border Jumping - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum
Castillo, Lattes, Santibáñez, Migración y fronteras, El Colegio de la Frontera Norte, Mexico, 2002.
Monsiváis, Carlos, Las migraciones culturales, Era, México, 2002.
Rodríguez de Palop, María, Derechos culturales y humanos de los migrantes, Madrid, Comillas University, 2000.
Zamora, Rodolfo, Migración y desarrollo regional, Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas, Mexico, 2000.
Ramírez González, Beatriz, ¿Son iguales las condiciones de pobreza del migrante mexicano en México y en Estados Unidos?: Perfil del migrante mexicano que regresaría a México, Biblioteca Digital, Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, 2008.
García y Diego, Campos, México y Estados Unidos frente a la migración de indocumentados, UNAM, México, 1988.
Villafuerte, Ana, Migración un fenómeno multidimensional entre México y Estados Unidos de Norteamérica, Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Campus Monterrey, Biblioteca Digital at
Jimenez, Jimena."Mobility and Migration Issues and their Implications for a North American Community Project" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Town & Country Resort and Convention Center, San Diego, California, USA, Mar 22, 2006. At
[13] The Border Crosser Card was a document stipulated in 1989 which allows the border residents of Canada and Mexico to cross freely to the United States 25 times in a week, if they promise to attain to determined restrictions: they cannot pass animal, vegetal products, nor seeds; they cannot stay more than two weeks in the United States (unless they have a Non-Stayer Tourist Visa), and they can pass from the United States to Canada/ Mexico freely, any kind of electronic products, clothes, furniture or automobiles, just if they pay the correspondent taxes to the products (a lot of them, are free taxed).
[20]See the entire report atwww.foxnews.com- MexicanState Issues 'How To' on Border Jumping - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum
Contacto:
eloy_caloca@yahoo.com.mx
-Estudiante de Relaciones Internacionales, al menos en mis ratos libres.
Pretendo ser escritor (también pretendía ser el rescate del superhéroe y cómic mexicanos)
"Gusto por las cosas complejas, tal vez por mi propia complejidad. Creo que en la complejidad reside la belleza, como los fractales en las flores o los sueños de siesta"...
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario