Presentación Evelyn Cruz

865 views

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
865
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
82
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Presentación Evelyn Cruz

  1. 1. Pressures U.S. places on Mexico to Curb Regional Illegal Migration<br />Evelyn H. Cruz<br />Arizona State University-College of Law<br />August 2011<br />
  2. 2. Relations between the Countries (Overview)<br />1980’s Laissez Fair or Benign Neglect—US completely ignored Mexico in passing IRCA<br />1990’s Crisis Management—US negotiated NAFTA avoiding issues of human migration and enacted severe restrictions on public assistance and on immigration relief.<br />2000’s short bilateralism era was ended by 9/11 and the resulting war on terror. Focus completely on creating a buffer to protect against terrorism.<br />
  3. 3. Current impact of US Immigration Policy on Mexico<br />The US tends to focus almost all its resources on militarizing and enhancing border security resulting in a dangerous environment for border crossers, giving way to the growth of human smuggling and drug organizations.<br />Border towns are micro-economies that benefit both sides of the border-but may burden Mexico more than U.S. (environmental, crime, contraband from U.S.)<br />
  4. 4. Examples of US Unilateral Border Initiatives<br />1993 Operation Hold the Line-TX/MX southern border.<br />1994 Operation Gatekeeper—CA/MX<br />2004 Arizona Border Control Initiative (ABC)<br />2007 Operation Gatekeeper II-a wall.<br />
  5. 5. The 90’s Bilateral Border Control Agreements<br />Mexico/US<br />1996 MOU on Consular Protection<br />1997 Joint Declaration on Migration<br />1998 MOU between CONAPO and INS<br />1999 MOU on Cooperation Against Border Violence<br />Canada/US<br />1995 Shared Accord on our Border<br />1997 Border Vision<br />1997 Cross-Border Crime Forum<br />1999 Canada-US Partnership Process<br />
  6. 6. Bilateral Action-The “Big One”: NAFTA<br />NAFTA enhanced some aspects of Mexico’s overall economic indicators (Trade rose from $49 Billion in 1994 to $210 Billion in 2007).<br />NAFTA subsidies in the corn industry and other agricultural products put many Mexican farmers and small business out of business and forced immigration North.<br />BUT NAFTA did not address the movement of people across MX-US border even to the extent of the movement between CN-US border.<br />
  7. 7. 2002 US/Canada SMART Border Agreement vs. 2002 US/Mexico SMART Border Agreement<br />Mexico: “Establish a joint advance passenger information exchange mechanism; explore methods to facilitate the movement of NAFTA travelers; reaffirm mutual commitment to Border Security initiative; continue frequent consultation on visa policies.<br />Canada: Jointly develop…common biometric identifiers in documentation; resume NEXUS pilot project; share advance passenger information; develop joint automated database.<br />Why Canada’s more measurable and concrete?<br />
  8. 8. Successes of the 2002 MX-US Accords<br />Deeper cooperation with U.S. government<br />Creation of Mexican working groups and task forces on migration.<br />Training of officials on fraud, surveillance, and intelligence.<br />Better protection of infrastructure from terrorism.<br />Participation in US TIPOFF System which tracks suspected terrorists.<br />
  9. 9. Shortcomings of 2002 MX-US Accords<br />Bottlenecks at ports of entry for Mexican goods to U.S. but easier for U.S. to enter Mexico (therefore guns, cash, and untaxed merchandise is entering Mexico from U.S.)<br />Slow funding process<br />Does not address migration problem<br />Drained energy from other pre-existing agreements and priorities<br />Agreement too focus on US interests disregarding some Mexican priorities.<br />Seguridad means both security and safety—US sees the first but not the second.<br />
  10. 10. Unfulfilled Expectations<br />Mexico and the United States had different ideas of what a border agreement should be.<br />The United States retained power to take decisions and execute plans unilaterally.<br />The primary goal of the U.S. is to control but not necessarily end undocumented workers entry. But they often speak otherwise or hint to a “future” resolution.<br />The United States wants to use Mexico as a security buffer zone.<br />
  11. 11. Unfulfilled Expectations<br />Mexico and Canada expected to receive better movement of goods and persons in exchange for their collaboration.<br />But for U.S. the priority from the MX-US accord was better border infrastructure and for the CN-US was the secured flow of persons.<br />
  12. 12. Canada v. Mexico<br />It remains difficult and lengthy for a Mexican National to get a visa to the United States and work visas are out of reach for most unskilled workers. Meanwhile the process for Canadians to enter the U.S. has improved<br />
  13. 13. Shadow Players in negotiating for Border Cooperation<br />Historical distrust between the two countries.<br />The growing involvement of US states in the immigration debate.<br />Low (US) public opinion of Mexico’s attempts to curb illegal immigration.<br />
  14. 14. Mexico’s unsung work to deter unauthorized immigration<br />Migration is beneficial to Mexico's economy. Even so Mexican have carried out a number of programs to disua.de immigration—such as public service announcements regarding dangers, assistance to migrants, some crackdown on migrant predators.<br />Mexico has significantly increased repatriation of non Mexicans on both northern and southern border.<br />Engaged in a drug war where the largest problem is out of their control—U.S. demand<br />
  15. 15. Suggestions for better Cooperation <br />Define a mutually beneficial long-term vision of North American integration<br />Reduce American tendency to react unilaterally<br />Address specific historical and economic causes of the continued flow of migrants headed North.<br />Improve Border customer service—ease travel for goods and people.<br />Public education –overcome assumptions, egocentricity, and misperceptions of partner countries.<br />

×