Tag: Immigration
Covid-19 is making things worse for Latin Americans
Cristina Camacho, a first-year International Development concentrator at SAIS, offers the following account of a February 17 even on “How Organized Crime is Evolving in Mexico and Central America” hosted by the Americas Society/Council of the Americas (AS/COA). The video is here.
Panelists:
• Luis Guillermo Solis, former President of Costa Rica, current Interim Director at the Kimberly Green Latin American and Caribbean Center at Florida International University
• Andrew Selee, President of the Migration Policy Institute
• Sonja Wolf, Assistant Professor with the Drug Policy Program at the Center for Economic Research and Teaching in Mexico
• Cecilia Tornaghi (Moderator), Managing Editor at Americas Quarterly
Key Takeaways:
• Criminal groups, specifically cartels in Mexico and street gangs in Central America, have thrived during the pandemic.
• As law enforcement is otherwise occupied and courts slowed down, gangs and cartels are recruiting, loansharking, and profiting off extortion, drug trafficking, and smuggling migrants to the US.
• Local governments have been unable or unwilling to tackle violence. Institutions are weak. Corruption and impunity are rampant.
• Though homicide rates have decreased, this is only one measure of violence. In some cases, a decrease in homicide rates is a result of back-door deals with gangs, which may have electoral benefits for political leaders.
• The Biden administration should balance working directly with counterpart Presidents and with civil society/nonprofit organizations on the ground.
• The Biden administration’s efforts to reform asylum mechanisms and legal pathways to migration will take time to implement. In the short-term, migration will rise if migrants are not turned back at the border.
Criminal groups have thrived during COVID-19
While economies are failing, unemployment is rising. Communities are regressing into poverty. Local and transnational criminal organizations have thrived. This has been due to several factors. Law enforcement is concerned with other tasks (such as enforcing curfews), more people are unemployed and increasingly likely to join criminal groups or turn to them for loans, and courts are closed or delayed due to lockdowns.
This contributes to already alarming levels of impunity and signals to criminals that they won’t face legal repercussions. Criminal groups have also taken to handing out food baskets and assistance to local communities. These dynamics raise questions about the health of local institutions, strength of community organizations, and the capacity of local security forces.
There has also been increased demand for human smugglers, as people seek to migrate to the US. Smugglers have benefitted from this rise in demand and have increased their prices accordingly. Selee explained that that The US-Mexico border has been closed under Title 42, which allows public health concerns as a reason to expel migrants and asylum-seeker. This enables smugglers to charge higher prices and extort migrants stuck along the way to the U.S.
Interpol has warned criminal groups will try to traffic COVID-19 vaccines; panelists agreed that this is not unlikely.
Challenges for local governments
Though many leaders in Central America have learned to speak the language of democracy, anti-corruption, and human rights, their institutions are not equipped to tackle investigations or properly combat violence. Some leaders are benefitting from using this discourse but not effecting real change. For example, anti-corruption commissions in Honduras and El Salvador have been ineffective compared to the one in Guatemala. Homicide rates have decreased, but Wolf cautions that this positive trend is not an indicator that overall violence has decreased. Truces with street gangs have allowed the state more access to certain areas needing public goods and services, but this also has clear electoral benefits for leaders. Local leaders must strengthen institutions and combat corruption and impunity.
Challenges for the Biden Administration
Panelists agreed that President Biden must shift his focus from Trump’s hands-off approach, toward addressing root causes of violence in Central America and Mexico, including institutional strength and trustworthiness, rule of law, and providing citizens with a perceived opportunity for a viable future.
Another challenge for the administration will be to decide when to partner with civil society groups or nonprofits rather than foreign governments. According to Selee, during his time as Vice-President, Biden favored working with foreign presidents. However, many of them are now accused of corruption. Biden needs tot know when to work with other partner organizations on important issues where governments may not be willing to contribute, such as anti-corruption.
The Biden administration plans to include rebuilding asylum application mechanisms (making them more accessible) and increasing the availability of work visas (such as H2A visas) for Central Americans. In 2019, 260,000 H2A visas were granted to Mexican workers, but only 9,000 to Central Americans. Adding opportunities for legal migration would help decrease irregular migration. In the short-term and to discourage peaks in migration, Selee advocated continuing to turn back migrants at the border as the only effective way of discouraging migration.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
She’s terrible but can’t do much more harm
Lots of things are wrong with the nomination of a diehard originalist, anti-abortion activist, and Trump enthusiast to “replace” on the Supreme Court the justice who made women equal under the law in the United States. But I incline to the view that the damage Amy Coney Barrett can do is limited, even if she opts–as is likely–to make decisions that toe the conservative line. Here’s why:
- Abortion: If Barrett joins other conservatives on the Court in reversing Roe v Wade or allowing very strict limits on abortion, the issue will be then be decided by the states. Abortion is not going to become illegal throughout the country. Blue states will continue to legalize it. Some red states will severely restrict or prohibit it. If you live in a red state and don’t like that, wake up and vote.
- Obamacare: If she becomes the deciding vote against the constitutionality of the current system for providing health insurance to the uninsured, the Democrats will move swiftly to pass Medicare for All. Provided they gain control of both the House and Senate, which seems likely at the moment, the Republicans will have unintentionally done universal health care a big favor.
- Guns: It’s a bit hard for me to see how the gun lobby can make any gains over the already unconstrained availability of firearms. At some point, minorities and liberal whites will begin carrying guns to protect themselves from the Boogaloo Boys. Then the conservatives will think again about the need for gun safety. That’s not a pretty picture, but it is a realistic one.
- Immigration: Here too it is difficult to see how things can get much worse, in particular for refugees wanting resettlement in the US and immigrants seeking asylum from well-founded fears of persecution. The conditions in which people, especially children separated from their parents, are detained are already appalling. The failure of the Republicans to provide an option for undocumented children (DACA) brought to the US by their parents is inexcusable. The refusal of visas to Muslims and black people as well as restrictions on international students are going to wreck tourism and higher education in the US, even after Covid19 is under control. Lifting of temporary protected status for people who have been in the US for decades is simply cruel.
- Affirmative action: The Court has already made achieving diversity in college admissions and employment far more difficult than it should be, but it seems unlikely even a more conservative court will eliminate affirmative action entirely. Many companies and universities–especially the better ones–are wanting more diverse staff and student bodies. They will find the ways and means to get them or fall victim to the competition.
- Religious freedom: Barrett belongs to a Christian community, the People of Praise, who describe themselves as charismatic and ecumenical (as in Christian ecumenical). She is thought to have committed herself to its “covenant,” which has not to my knowledge been published. We can expect her to come down on the side of those who favor the rights of religious communities over the rights of individuals, for example by allowing them to deny abortion rights under their employee health plans. But the Court has already moved far in that direction. Her voice will be an added one to the conservative majority.
Barrett describes herself as an “originalist” in the mold of her mentor, the late Justice Scalia. Whatever this label once meant, it now allows its adherents to decide just about anything the right wing of the political establishment wants: restrictions on a woman’s right to control her own body, an individual right to bear arms outside the context of a “well-ordered” militia, restrictions on the decisions of universities and companies about which students and employees will serve their purposes best, harsh treatment of immigrants, denial of government-subsidized health insurance to tens of millions of Americans, and a preference for religious communities over the rights of individuals.
So yes, Amy Coney Barrett is a terrible choice for the Supreme Court and will live up to all the negative expectations people like me have of her. With a 6/3 right-wing majority the Court will lose the respect of the more than half the country that will vote for Joe Biden and want him to appoint Ginzburg’s successor. But a lot of the damage Barrett might cause has already been done. I doubt she can do a lot more.
PS: I realize I failed to consider the impact of Barrett, if confirmed before the election, on its outcome. Judging from past performance on the Court, all the Republican-appointed judges will favor Trump’s election in any case that gets to the Court. So Barrett’s appointment does not change the majority on election issues either.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, September 18
The respected annual poll by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs finds sharp partisan divisions among Americans, even though they support engagement abroad. WaPo has a good report.
For Democrats, the five leading threats to US vital interests are, in order, the coronavirus pandemic, climate change, racial inequality in the United States, foreign interference in U.S. elections and economic inequality in this country.
For Republicans, the top five threats to vital US interests are the development of China as a world power, international terrorism, large numbers of immigrants and refugees coming into the country, domestic violent extremism and Iran’s nuclear program. Here’s the survey.
NYT says China is losing friends in Europe.
Senate Democrats have a $350 billion package to counter China.
Politico says China issue won’t determine US elections. Former DHS aide to VP Pence on coronavirus quits, blasts Trump
StratCom head sees no need for nuclear test. [Note: this is an issue in net week’s exercise]
NATO report says Taliban is flush with cash.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, June 26
– Defense News says there are now 3 military plans for competing with China
– Fareed Zakaria says China is bungling its own foreign policies.
-US military is reducing its Mexican border deployments.
– SAIS Prof Ed Joseph tells sad story of cancelled Kosovo summit.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, June 19
In class I make a big deal about legal authorities and bureaucratic processes. They matter. I also mention the Administrative Procedures Act that sets rules for how government can change its regulations. That was the basis for the Supreme Court ruling yesterday on DACA. The Chief Justice, writing for the 5-4 majority didn’t say DACA was legal, just that the Trump administration was arbitrary and capricious in trying ti void it.
Process matters in national security, too. The president may want to reduce US troop levels in Germany, but he hasn’t signed an order.
And I remain puzzled about the pandemic vaccine program called Operation Warp Speed. I still haven’t seen any authorities for its operation. And testimony yesterday from a 4-star who is supposed to be heading it says he’ll direct report to the Defense Secretary. Huh?
Meanwhile, Politico says there’s a loyalty purge going on in the Pentagon [corrected link]
Vox says Steve Bannon wants to turn VOA into a propaganda ministry.
NYT says Trump has regularly undermined his own China policy.
Keeping hope alive, several national security professionals are now running for Congress.
FYI, DOD has released its newest Defense Space Strategy.
And a new civ-mil prof has a good piece on keeping the military apolitical.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, May 9
– The USTR has released its annual trade policy report, with lots of discussion of Chinese practices. Nothing comparable from Peter Navarro, who is supposed to be busy getting companies to produce medical supplies.
– The president himself doesn’t know whether to call his Chinese trade deal a success or failure.
– To avoid border wall fights, Senate Appropriations will delay DHS, Veterans and MilCon bills until the expected big political fight in the fall — but will go ahead with other spending bills.
– Maybe South Korea declared victory too early.
– As most of you know, I have high regard for my former boss, Joe Biden. But I was appalled to read of the campaign’s amateurish efforts to produce a virtual rally.
– And if you want to contrast the smart Trump juggernaut with the oh too 20th century Biden approach, read this.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
RSS - Posts
