2016 Migratory Report by Matias Cavoti Part 3: Mexico and the Central American Northern Triangle (El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras)

Mexico  and the Central American Northern Triangle (El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras): The  Fatal Journey of 2015 report establishes that Mexico is a transit country that has a characteristic of having an  internal vertical border that goes from south to north, where Central Americans migrants experience total illegality, vulnerability, marginalization and suffering at the hands of criminal organizations praying on them the whole way extorting, enslaving, torturing, kidnapping migrants holding them for  ransom. To understand the level of violence migrants have to deal with,  for example,  more Honduran nationals have died in their trek north from homicides related to organized crime than from riding on top of trains like the Beast. Another example of gangs ominous presence on the routes, it is known that the Mara Salvatrucha controls whole sections of the transit routes and migrants must pay to pass. Now what is fascinating to discover when working on this subject is that in the TIP report only makes marginal mention of this situation with the Maras or with any other form of organized crime, and the report in general is too soft on Mexico  omitting some major issues, the whole section on this country is pretty short even though it is a major transit country for mix migratory flows that have had some major problems during 2014-2015, like the massive arrival of unaccompanied Central Americans minors.     

It must be noted that in most of the sources used for this report mentions that trafficking in persons in this region has become a major issue, while  the State Departments TIP study qualifies all of these countries, Mexico, the Northern Triangle States and Nicaragua, as Tier 2, even though human trafficking is a problem especially smuggling and forced recruitment into gangs. Adding to this these States have major institutional and structural limitations fighting these migratory crimes, having to deal with deep-rooted corruption among public officials. But the US Report chooses not to criticize these countries especially Mexico, possibly  because they are collaborating with the Obama administration trying to stop the flow of migrants from arriving at the United States Sothern border even overlooking some problems and possible human rights violations  so they do not have to downgrade any of these countries TIP classification from Tier 2 to Tier 2 watch list. In the case of Mexico, there have been accusations in various reports and new articles of heavy-handed policing, poor treatment towards irregular migrants, lack of infrastructure for detention centers for deportation, corruption of State officials and not taking petitions for asylum from possible refugees.    

Before we move on, we must explain what are these "tiers", in the TIP report it is a grading system for the Human Trafficking situations of each country in covered in its pages. Tier 1 is for States that meet the requirements are at least the minimum standers of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA) which its sole purpose is to fight Human Trafficking and raise awareness. Tier 2 countries are those that do not meet the minimum standard but are putting in a great effort to do so. Tier 2 Watch List, are States even though they are putting effort into battle trafficking in persons but the lack of progress leads to the country downgrade, if a country is more than two years in a row in this classification it will be downgrade again to tier 3. And finally tier 3, these are  States that do not meet any of the TVPA's minimum standards and are not making any or very little effort in stopping human trafficking. 
What characterized the migratory situation in Mexico  and the Southern border of the United State last few years was  sudden and massive flow of unaccompanied minors from Central America, in 2014 Mexican authorities intercepted 68.631  minors transiting through its territory, United States border guards stopped 52.000 minors in 2014 and 28.387 in 2015 (Ahmed NY 2016). Gang violence, lack of opportunities, severe drought affecting the agricultural sector of their respective countries and searching for family member already established in the US, had generated a mass exodus of minors from central America adding to the rest of the already existing flow of economic migrants, asylum seekers, refugees and stateless people.

Now this phenomenon of the unaccompanied minors as explained in a report by the Congressional Research Services establishes the way that this situation manifested itself was a sudden surge of people arriving in a very similar fashion as one would see with massive displacements after a natural disaster or a military conflict, but having its own particular dynamic to itself, a flow of children that are particularly easy targets for traffickers to exploit and for gangs in the area to force into their membership, so if this situation wasn't addressed quickly things could get worse and quickly.

With a potential crisis looming US government engaged and pressured Mexico to step up control and stop as many migrants possible in their transit through its territory. Mexico's deportations jumped from 78.000  in 2013 to 170.000 in 2015 (Ahmed NY 2016), filtering large amounts of migrants from getting to the US border in the first place, acting as a buffer. Mexico with financial help from the United States, started heavy policing on its southern border adding more security at its 12 points of entry in the south with its borders with Guatemala and Belize, controlling freight trains heading north, like the Beast and other cargo vehicles and creating 100 mobile checkpoints throughout its territory.  But in the context of this heightened control irregular migrants especially those headed north ended up pushing migrant off the normal route they were taking, choosing more risky options in their transit, possibly using services of smugglers and having to deal with gangs, police or State officials.    

The US government put into motion Operation Coyote in 2014 and Operation Coyote 2.0 in 2015, working with Mexican authorities to bring smuggler to justice taking extra steps to try and capture them at the border, and also trying to dismantle the networks in Mexico.

Now let us briefly address the push factors from the Northern Triangle States and Nicaragua,   gang violence and major criminal activities in these countries  can be traced back to the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration act 1996 were the United State deported 46.000 convicts between 1998 to 2005(Ahmed NY 2016), including members of the Mara Salvatrucha and the 18th Street gangs, setting the groundwork for organized crime flourish in these unprepared countries. Adding to this situation the fatal journeys study establishes that Mexico War on Drugs, pushed their organized crime south to these countries, while South American drug cartels started to use this region for transit of their goods, pretty much disrupting these societies with a strong spike in violence and crime in these nations, this added to the poor  economic situation of these States were already going through. These push factors have been so persistent since the 80's has generated a culture of migration in these countries.  All three northern triangle States made the UN's top ten countries with the highest homicide rate in the world in 2014, with Guatemala in fifth place with 39.9 (per 10.000), El Salvador is in fourth place with 41.2 and Honduras in first place with 90.4 (CNN 2014).   

The US government also engaged with these countries to try different types of way not only sending these nations 750 million dollars Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador to help these countries to address this problem. The Obama administration has invested trying to create public awareness in these countries of the dangers of irregular migration, using billboards and public service announcements.

A big issue for the families that are left behind in the Central American countries are there missing love ones that migrated north, but never contacted them again possibly having died in the transit.  And in the Fatal Journey 2016 study I must be noted there is no coordinated system for tracking migrants deaths in Mexico of  Central Americans, there are no centralized statistics on migrants, little effort to identify or repatriate bodies.  So Central American countries have established a joint project to identify missing migrants collecting information on bodies found along the route comparing it with the info given by the families. This is a collaboration with national governments of El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala, with the Mexican State of Chiapas, NGOs and family associations, these are bottom-up initiatives started by the citizens in their respective State pushing the governments into action.  

Cavoti's Black Box, Migratory Policy-Political Theory: Xenophobia in-group, out-group and the Other

Today we are going to work  the concept of Xenophobia  and the "Other", no to start off from where I left off at the previus post Wendt (1994) also explains there are other factors that condition and established interests for any State/Actor. So now I’m going to explain to you what concepts this author wields to describe why an actor can take unilateral action, which one could described as selfish act of the State. Unilateral acts plague the world of immigration; it’s a problem due to the fact that many times the States react this way, never really solving the problem, affecting its relations with other states, (proactive measures never happen). These are the three concepts, Wendt points out to explain why a State acts this way; the first one he borrows a concept from Jonathan Mercer (1993) In-groups and Out-groups; the second one is the dependence of States their domestic population’s opinion and; Finally, nationalism. Currently in the case of Argentina (that we’ve have been using as an example on all of my posts), the immigrants do not get in trouble in any of these three concepts, therefore, the State and its population  do not  perceives them as a problem, in general.

Something one must  keep in mind is the distorted image of the other that comes from over exaggerated conjunction of the three concepts seen above  all sandwiched  together,  have a very important impact genesis of xenophobia,  xenophobia,  exophobia and endophobia (Marmora; 2004). Discrimination and some level of intolerance have always existed in Argentina and there can be a low level of xenophobia towards certain groups of foreigners who are ethnically different, like the Aymara (ethnic group from Bolivia), Africans in general and Chinese. But this discrimination does not reach by far levels that exist in Europe or in the United States of North America. But if the Government does not take a greater role in to integrating these immigrants, especially migrants from Bolivia, that make up one of the most important migration flows to the country and it’s one of the most vulnerable. Without integration there could be a progressive increase in discrimination and xenophobia from the local population against that particular community. Xenophobia, even though it shows the excessive prejudice of the local population, it seeks to protect the group, from the other is seen as  invaders, the one that alters the ontological order. But the widespread xenophobia produces a harmful effect for the State to a point that a my be possible that it can isolate itself because of the rejection and international outcry from affected States from where the migrants comes from, which feel that their citizens are not respected or worse persecuted. In the case of Argentina, the countries where the migrants mostly come from are from its neighbors, and they are at the same time Argentinas trading partners. If Argentina starts blocking migrants from these countries in retaliation block trade from this country, and take measures on their nationals that live in these countries.

Now we are going to concentrate on the concept of the Other, and to do that  we most  refer ourselves back to  in-groups and out-groups , is where the cultural 'other' is created or spawned. For example in Argentinean society (where I live) this “other” in principle, does not represent a threat, but in the US people like Donald Trump  with his fear mongering build multiple Others that are hellbent in destroying their soceity from the inside, it a crude political tool but sadly it works . Now back to Argentina we have a fairly open society ( note I also think the US a pretty open too) where most migrants are allowed to joining the in-group; Argentine society has particularity to allow certain integration of immigrants and at the same time it allows them to maintain a certain level of their identity from their mother land, this creates sub identities that can be seen on a national level. Argentina has basically the same basic identity of the melting pot like the US, it just differs in some aspects, especially historical, slavery that lade the beadrock to deep rooted and structural racism leading to social conflict, in our case racism is limited.  Social conflict here in Argentina is fueled by class and economic sectors, argentines are elitists poverty make us uncomfortable (be it immigrant or local), it does not equate with our national myth that we are a prosperous   European country in South America.

 Second aspect explained by Wendt, is the question of public opinion, this is a point which is very clear, the majority the immigrants that arrive here and do the legal paper work to become residents. Therefor they become part of the economic system paying taxes, therefore they have the right to use the public services if need necessary. Because it’s so simple to become  a resident for migrants from MERCOSUR, Argentina disarticulates a potential social conflict, this I’ll explain later in future post. But despite of this in Argentina a myth persist in certain right wing sectors, that there is a disproportionate mass of migrants who prey on the resources of the State, but as we have seen they have the right and there use of public services is not parasitic in nature, its like they do not have the right to these people, I have had heated discussions with Argentine expats living in the States on this issue that cut and past their the right wing views on the subject projecting  what they perceive  happing in the US here, talking about a bolivian invassion and the dangers behind this, and its just not true, they come here to work and they do stuff the Argentines are not willing to do occupaying  3D type jobs ( note check out My blog on 3D migrants). But this perception is just a political tool used by certain economic/political sectors. It should not be forgotten that migrants that become residents can vote in certain elections this benefits some and harms others, on an electoral level. To some extent migrants can participate in the country's internal political process, but also may be victims and/or hostages, or may be three conditions simultaneously.



If you like the review give me a hand and support me on Patreon at this Link that will make me, Matias Cavoti very happy to keep writing.

Political Theory-Migratory Policy: States Social Identity and how they Establish their Political Interests.

As we have seen on previus post Corporate identity is the engine that provides the initiative to the actor/States for their actions, but these are conditioned by the social relations of the actor, therefore the corporate identity depends on the relations of the subject with others (Wendt 1994; 356). Here is where we introduce the concept of social identity where the actor attributes meaning to itself and by doing this it takes perspective of the others actors, it is impossible to think an actor as a person who is completely alone in the world, likes it or not it must interact with others, to a greater or lesser extent this depends on each State. The two identities have a strong interrelation and feedback in to each other, to strengthen over time. But there is something one must keep in mind, that an actor has one corporate identity, but may have multiple social identities, but it is always limited and determined by the historical and cultural background of the actor. When one assumes an identity the actor also gives identity to others and in this context the vision of the State is born. Social identity can be simplified   in these terms, it the way the actor sees itself, how he sees others and how it’s seen. The vision of the actor in the world is born of this social identity. In the case of migratory policy we’ll see how the definition of a social identity condition de decisions of an actor, in this case Argentina.

Identity determines interest and therefore a change in any aspect of the Sates identity, will drag in a new group of interests. We are using the example of Argentina Migratory Policy in my post, to explain this point.  Initially you can see that the previous Immigration law caused dissociation between the actions ^[6] of the actor, social reality in its borders and its identity. Argentina’s view on migrants had a serious distortion of what was happening on a domestic level and on a international level, the old law that established its migratory policy did not serve the countries best interests, you can si a similar situation in the US  that has a high dissociation between its migration policy, social reality and their national identity, which has sparked a strong debate on what the government should do, this point will be developed in detail later in other posts. What we can say preliminarily is that currently that the Argentine identity revolves around the fact that sees itself and is seen by other States ( especially in the region), as a democratic country that respects human rights and that it had a historic role of reception of migrants.

Within the process of identity formation Wendt says that the actor uses imitation and social learning (Kowert; 2001), this is a borrowed concept from other constructivist author from another area of investigation, that is Jean Peaget, an expert in the psychology of education. We must establish whether Argentina immigration policy is the result of imitation or is a product of social learning. The actor learns to change their knowledge and perceptions of the world, and this is a dynamic process that is maturing over time, the perceived world is not a static place but is always changing.

Also can be exposed ahead of time that there is no doubt that the Argentina learned from their past mistakes committed during law 22.439 and capitalizes on that to create an immigration policy that is much more efficient, functional and that fits the needs of the country. One must ask what could have changed in the Government/State or within the population or what modification on the basis of their social relations, would lead to a change Argentina’s view, that made it change its migratory policy? Because something triggered an adjustment in policy and created a whole new theoretical body of knowledge, to be able to operate a new international and domestic reality. But this knowledge is not a copy of reality, here comes the factor of perception, one tends to see what best suits ones interests best, may be relatively selective according to the subject and this in turn is determined by the experience, needs and how the actor encodes and decodes the information that it receives from the world. The perceived world is a subjective world that can be shared by other actors or not.


If you like the review give me a hand and support me on Patreon at this Link that will make me, Matias Cavoti very happy to keep writing.