Political Asylum in the Wake of the Mexican Drug War: A New Group of Stateless Refugees?
DEVELOPMENTS
In a recent address to the United States Congress, Mexican President Felipe Calderon said he regretted the flight of Mexicans north of the border, citing a lack of economic opportunities and the rising violence as a result of gangs and drugs.
Mexican drug cartels and their violent assaults have contributed to a bloody four years throughout the country. According to a recent report by the Brookings Institute, measuring progress in the war on drugs continues to be difficult. Murder rates are high, and public confidence in Mexican judicial and political institutions is low. Mexican authorities are unable to contain the violence, and all aspects of Mexican society are suffering as a result. Over the past two years, increasing numbers of Mexican nationals have arrived at U.S. borders and requested political asylum.
The domestic dialogue on the United States’ immigration policy often focuses on ways to curb the thousands of illegal entries to the U.S. each year, citing their collective social and economic impact on domestic resources. Immigration to the U.S. is by no means a new headline, but the recent, violent developments in Mexico present an interesting twist on this longstanding policy debate.
For the foreseeable future, the surge in claims for political asylum will most likely continue. A heated climate surrounding Mexican nationals in some U.S. border states is predicted to lead to arrests, detentions, prolonged immigration proceedings and deportation. It is already evident that both countries lack sufficient resources and legal clarity to deal with these groups of drug war refugees.
BACKGROUND
Drug war violence throughout Mexico has skyrocketed in the past four years. There are 143 murders per 100,000 residents in the Mexican state of Chihuahua, a rate comparable to that in Colombia during the height of its drug war. Kidnappings, extortion demands, closures of businesses and high murder rates have become commonplace. For thousands of Mexicans who have lost relatives to the violence or who have themselves been targeted, the situation has become untenable.
Estimates of how many Mexicans have fled to the U.S. because of the drug violence range upwards of several tens of thousands. The surge in applications for political asylum has sparked the determination process, but because this process is so lengthy, the majority of these claims have yet to be decided. The asylum seekers generally face prolonged detention or immediate deportation.
Unfortunately, it is reasonable to expect a continued pattern of arrest, detention and even deportation for these asylum seekers. On the U.S. side of the border, the political climate has become even more heated in the wake of Arizona’s legislation that will allow law enforcement officials to use more stringent and controversial methods to enforce immigration law.
Some would argue that claims for political asylum are a nebulous, wide-ranging component of international humanitarian law. It can be difficult to verify claims, and these claims can be made frivolously. Judges have maintained that, given the widespread nature of the violence in Mexico, particular asylum seekers are not targeted personally. Claims for asylum have also been rejected on the grounds that relocation within Mexico is a viable option.
On the other hand, there is a strong case for granting these Mexican nationals’ claims, at least until the violence in Mexico is quelled. The reality of the situation in Mexico is grim. Social and economic ties are dysfunctional, and the risk of mortality is high. Recently, a few cases have been decided in favor of the asylum seekers after lengthy legal proceedings. Petitions have been written and signed among border communities in the U.S. for heightened awareness and for legal relief for Mexican nationals seeking asylum.
ANALYSIS
This phenomenon is highly complicated because the legal context surrounding each claim for asylum is complicated and the potential for Mexican nationals entering the U.S. to face prolonged detention is highly likely. The larger debate surrounding immigration issues has fueled a divisive atmosphere in the U.S., and the legislation enacted by Arizona will make it illegal to be in the state with out proof of citizenship. The implementation and the consequences of this law have already brought considerable controversy and debate.
The entrance of claims to political asylum adds a new dimension to the political climate and may in fact complicate issues of jurisdiction for Mexican nationals found at the U.S. border or inside the U.S. Some fear that granting Mexicans asylum has already become too politicized in the broader context of the immigration debate. It remains to be seen whether or not international humanitarian code can directly apply to these scenarios. If not, is there a case for expanding the breadth of the grounds for granting political asylum, given the situation Mexicans are facing as well as the outdated nature of the political asylum system?
Whether or not the violence in Mexico extends for a year, a decade or more, it is reasonable to expect that many more people who cross the border into the U.S. will seek political asylum. U.S. and Mexican local, state and federal policy should seek to reflect this, and civil society groups on both sides of the border should learn about these dynamics. Both governments should clarify their stances on the claims for political asylum being made at U.S. ports of entry. It is important to differentiate between illegal entry to the U.S. and claims for political asylum. Unfortunately this will be extremely difficult to do, and thousands of Mexicans may find themselves in between two undesirable options: detention or a return to Mexico.
In the short term we can expect detentions to increase, leading to a growing group of stateless detainees seeking asylum in the U.S. It is reasonable to expect that there will be parallel, illegal entry into the U.S. from Mexican nationals who are fleeing the violence but choose not to pursue legal channels for requesting asylum. This second, less visible group, would most likely be harder to track, access and engage.
Clearly this situation has the potential to escalate and to evolve into one which challenges authorities, judges, lawyers and activists on both sides of the border. On a broader level, both countries – if not the international community as well – should continue to take immediate steps to confront and mitigate the violence in Mexico. The security threat to the U.S. is evident, and the violence continues to spread. Containment of the violence will require additional civilian and military resources and funding from both sides of the border.
Vaughn Hester is a data analyst at CrowdFlower, a crowdsourcing startup based in San Francisco, California. She has a background in international policy and refugee issues and was born and raised in El Paso, Texas.
