The U.S. relies on countries south of the border for immigration enforcement.
With the 2024 U.S. presidential campaign in full swing, both parties have taken a hard line on immigration. As political scientist and Good Authority fellow Alexander Kustov notes, U.S. public opinion polls show declining support for pro-immigration policies. Among voters, restrictive immigration policies now seem increasingly popular.
Missing from the headlines, however, is a wider discussion on the politics of migration across the Americas, and the impact on countries that see thousands of people heading north. Understanding what drives people towards the U.S. – and policy measures being implemented throughout the region to reduce the numbers seeking asylum – is also important to the conversation.
Immigration is on the U.S. ballot
During the Republican National Convention, hundreds of delegates waved “Mass Deportation Now!” signs. And, at a recent campaign rally in Wisconsin, Donald Trump reiterated his anti-immigration plans, suggesting that the deportation process would be a “bloody story.” In an interview with Time magazine, Trump explained that he would rely on local law enforcement, the National Guard, and possibly the military to carry out his mass deportation operation. The Republican Party platform includes the deportation program alongside other immigration policies such as completing the border wall. Using advanced technology is also part of the GOP strategy to seal the U.S. border with Mexico.
Democrats have been less aggressive in their rhetoric about immigrants. But party leaders have also enacted or proposed restrictive policies. For example, the Migration Policy Institute estimates that, by the end of his presidency, Joe Biden will have deported roughly the same number of people as were deported during the Trump administration. In addition, Kamala Harris has pledged to revive the bipartisan border bill that Biden had backed, but was subsequently blocked by Senate Republicans. This bill proposed emergency border shutdowns in the event of high migrant crossings. And it allocated funding to expand the border wall and increase deportation flights.
Stories about immigrants, both real and invented, that take place on the U.S. side of the border dominate the news. Yet this focus conceals how much other countries – primarily in Latin America – actually carry out U.S. immigration policy.
It’s a dangerous journey to the U.S.
The majority of migrants who arrive at the U.S.-Mexico border come from Latin America. Over half come from Mexico, Guatemala, Venezuela, Cuba, Ecuador, and Colombia. Many are fleeing violence, often perpetrated by organized criminal groups. Others hope to escape political repression or economic crises.
The U.S. Border Patrol’s Southwest Land Border Encounters tracks the number of apprehensions and expulsions of migrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. In December 2023, the number of encounters reached a record high. The number of encounters with Venezuelans, for instance, was nearly eight times what it had been a year prior.
The increasing number of migrants attempting to reach the U.S. by land, combined with the increasing geographic diversity of migrants, means that countries en route to the U.S. are also dealing with unprecedented levels of migrants. According to Will Freeman, fellow for Latin American studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, one consequence is an increase in predatory operations along the migration routes. Organized criminal groups charge migrants for passage across borders, while bandits rob vulnerable migrants. And many countries in the region are unable or unwilling to control these criminal activities.
Outsourcing immigration control to Mexico
In 2008, the U.S. and Mexico signed the first Letter of Agreement for the Merida Initiative. The third of the initiative’s four pillars was to “create a 21st century border structure.” Through this agreement, the United States became more actively involved in strengthening Mexico’s southern border with Belize and Guatemala. This project took shape in 2014 when Mexican President Peña Nieto announced the Southern Border Program. The United States funded the program through the Merida Initiative, providing millions of dollars to Mexico to modernize border security and train border patrol troops.
When Andres Manuel López Obrador became president of Mexico in 2018, he pursued a different style of immigration management. Mexico’s government sought to prioritize human rights and economic development for Central America. But by 2019, in the face of the Trump administration’s threat of devastating tariffs, López Obrador agreed to the Migrant Protection Protocols, also known as the “Remain in Mexico” policy. Under the new policy, U.S. border officials would send migrants seeking asylum back across the border. Migrants would thus await a decision on their asylum claims in Mexico, rather than in the U.S.
Before the Supreme Court ruled that the Biden administration could end the program in June 2022, the U.S. had sent more than 80,000 asylum seekers to Mexico, according to the Mexican Foreign Ministry. Migrants awaiting their hearings in Mexico suffered violence and lacked access to essential services. In addition, nearly half lost their cases because they were unable to get back to the United States for their hearings.
The strain on Mexico was compounded by the U.S. expulsion policy under Title 42, which came into effect at the onset of the pandemic in March 2020 and lasted through May 2023. According to the Washington Office on Latin America, a human rights advocacy group, the application of Title 42 “removed the basic right to seek asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border.” Mexico agreed to accept expelled migrants from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti, and Venezuela.
During this period, the Trump administration pressured Mexico to deploy its national guard to secure both the southern and northern borders. And the U.S. also pressured the Mexican government to require visas from people arriving from an expanded list of countries, including Brazil, Ecuador, and Venezuela.
While the Migrant Protection Protocols and Title 42 are no longer active policies, U.S. pressure on Mexico remains strong. Soon after the Biden administration ended its use of Title 42, U.S, officials met with the Mexican government to negotiate a new arrangement allowing the U.S. to push migrants back into Mexico. And in January of this year, responding to U.S. pressure, Mexico intensified the use of its national guard in policing the border.
Panama also deals with U.S. policies – and problems
U.S. policies like pushing Mexico to adopt visa requirements have a ripple effect throughout the region. Mexico’s visa requirements have made it harder for citizens of targeted countries like Venezuela to fly into Mexico. This means more migrants had no choice but to use the land route, which crosses from Colombia into Panama through the Darién Gap.
The Darién Gap, an approximately 10,000-square-mile jungle region, extends from northern Colombia to southern Panama. There are no roads, no cell phone service – and no government. The journey through the sparsely populated zone is replete with both natural and criminal dangers.
A decade ago, only a few hundred migrants each year might have braved the harsh route. Last year, in spite of the dangers, 520,000 migrants crossed the Darién Gap on their journey to the U.S. According to a Human Rights Watch report, many migrants reported being robbed, and hundreds of women reported experiencing sexual violence. Many other migrants have died or gone missing on their journey through the Darién Gap.
Panama bends to U.S. pressure
In the past, Panama maintained a facilitative policy toward migrants. Government officials registered migrants when they came out of the Darién jungle and moved them through the country to the Costa Rican border “quickly and in an orderly fashion.”
On July 1, Panama inaugurated a new president, José Raúl Mulino. Within hours, his administration signed a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. to reduce migration through Panama. A statement from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security declared, “this program will help the Panamanian government to remove foreign nationals who do not have a legal basis to remain in Panama.” To this end, the U.S. government committed to pay for deportation flights for migrants entering Panama through the Darién Gap.
Pres. Mulino declared that “the true southern border of the USA is not Texas, but Darién.” And, following U.S. efforts to tighten its border, the Mulino administration recently erected barbed wire fencing along commonly used crossings in the Darién Gap.
As the U.S. pushes its migration problems and policies further south, Colombian leaders have reacted with dismay. For example, Colombian President Gustavo Petro lamented: “the barbed wires in the jungle will only bring drowned people into the sea. Migration is stopped by removing economic blockades and improving the economy of the south.”
Whoever wins the White House race will have to respond to an electorate currently demanding harsh policies to curtail immigration. While there are substantive differences between the proposed immigration policies and rhetoric of the two U.S. presidential candidates, we can be fairly sure that the U.S. will continue to lean on Latin America to help control migration. As such, we should expect to see increasing barriers to movement across the region – and a corresponding increase in the criminal organizations that thrive by exploiting migrants.
Heather Sullivan is a 2024-2025 Good Authority fellow.
The post How U.S. migration policies shift the burden to Latin America appeared first on Good Authority.