Thread: A Mexican view of U.S. immigration debate

IMMIGRATION
A Mexican view of U.S. immigration debate
Former Mexican Foreign Minister Jorge Castañeda shares his perspectives on U.S. immigration policy -- what works, what doesn't and what people ignore.
Posted on Sun, Feb. 17, 2008
BY CASEY WOODS
cwoods@MiamiHerald.com

Q. Why did you write `Ex-Mex'?

A. I thought it was important that there be a Mexican viewpoint in the U.S. immigration debate. Right now, the Mexican viewpoint is not present. There is a liberal viewpoint, a conservative viewpoint, a Latino or Hispanic viewpoint -- but strictly speaking, there is not a Mexican viewpoint. I don't pretend to be the Mexican viewpoint, but a Mexican viewpoint.

Q.In your book, you talk about the flow of labor exchange between the United States and Mexico going back to the 1890s. What are some of the surprising elements of that history that most Americans don't know?

A. First of all, that it exists and that this has been going on for a long time. In other words, many Americans seem to think that wide-scale Mexican immigration to the United States is something new. It's not.

The second point is that there are not more people coming from Mexico than before; rather, it is that more people are staying in the United States, which gives the impression there are more, which is, I think, rather new.

The third point is that Mexicans used to be concentrated in a few areas of the United States, but they are going more places. They have been boxed in, not walled out, because that's what walls do -- they keep people in. People from Mexico have had to move all over the United States, rather than just staying in the traditional gateway states such as California and Texas. Why? Because they are not allowed to come and go anymore, because if you build fences to keep them out, it just keeps them in.

Q.Are you frustrated with the U.S. government's immigration crackdown?

A. I wouldn't limit the frustration to the crackdown, because that is just the most recent part of the frustration in Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean. President Bush committed himself to reaching an immigration agreement with Mexico, then he committed to comprehensive immigration reform, then he committed to a temporary worker program, and then he didn't deliver on any of them. And once he wasn't able to deliver on anything, he pursued the hard-line crackdown part. It's really the worst of both worlds. The crackdown is almost the least of it within the entire eight years of the administration. It's the nastiest part, but it's not necessarily the most negative over the long term.

Q. You are critical about the way the U.S. government enforces immigration, yet Mexico detains and deports thousands of undocumented immigrants each year. What do you think of Mexico's enforcement?

A. I think we are somewhat hypocritical in that we mistreat many Central American immigrants here. The difference is that most of the people who come to Mexico from Central and South America are on their way to the United States. They aren't here to find jobs. To a large extent, we are doing a little bit of the United States' dirty work for it. I don't agree with it, because I don't believe we should violate human rights in order to stop what the United States calls ''OTM,'' or ''other than Mexican,'' immigration. But unless it's part of an overall deal, as in comprehensive immigration reform, there's really no incentive to change. If there is an immigration agreement with Mexico, then there is incentive for Mexico to seal off its southern border in an honest, secure, humane way.

Q. Isn't there a Mexican interest in closing its southern border in a humane way?

A. What do we have to gain? They're not coming to Mexico, they're going to the United States.

Q. But doesn't Mexico have to deal with the consequences of the immigration, in terms of the criminal activity such as smuggling, and then the cost of deporting those they catch?

A. They're largely just passing through. It's not really a major problem for Mexico. We do it, but we do it because the United States pressures us to. By the way, the United States doesn't pressure us to do it with the Cubans, it pressures us to do it with Central Americans.

Q. What role do you think Mexico should play in patrolling the U.S. border and preventing illegal immigration?

A. If there is an immigration agreement, if there is comprehensive immigration reform, then Mexico should step up and share responsibility with the United States in regulating that flow.

Before that happens, there is no incentive for Mexico to stop people from leaving. Why should we? This has been going on for well over 100 years, and if the United States doesn't want to change its attitude, why should we change our attitude?

Q. What role do you believe immigration will play, or is playing, in the U.S. presidential race?

A. It's playing a paradoxical role. Thankfully, the two crazies, [U.S. Rep. Tom] Tancredo and [U.S. Rep. Duncan] Hunter, went nowhere. On the Republican side, Sen. [John] McCain, who has had a progressive attitude on immigration, seems to be doing quite well. On the Democratic side, all of the candidates seem to agree that comprehensive immigration reform is indispensable.

Obviously, there are extreme groups who want to make immigration a litmus test like abortion or stem-cell research, but it doesn't seem to be working, which is wonderful.

Q. What do you think might break the current stalemate on immigration-policy reform in the United States?

A. There are two sorts of issues on this. One is that people who are in favor of immigration reform like Sens. John McCain and [Edward] Kennedy have to realize -- they have already begun to realize -- that if you stand up for it, the American people will go along. You have to face up to the strident extremists.

Everyone has to understand on both sides that no one will get all of what they want and only what they want. The liberals have to understand that they will not get legalization without a temporary worker program, and the conservatives have to understand that they will not get a temporary worker program without legalization. Everyone has to understand that if you want to build a fence, you have to build doors and gates in the fence so people can come in and out. I think it might take some time for people to realize this, but little by little we are getting there.

Castañeda splits his time between Mexico City and New York, where he is a professor of politics and Latin American studies at New York University.
http://www.miamiherald.com/540/story/421074.html

Am I the only one who can hear this bum chuckling when he talks about how hypocritical Mexico is when it comes to deporting Central Americans? That crap about there not being more Mexicans here, but rather walls have forced them to stay instead of going home leaves me stumped. What walls are he referring to?..

The walls in his mind. Until the Mexicans own the USA people like him will not be satisfied.

Jorge Castañeda's view on immigration is not surprising. Once again, the United States is to blame and mexico is the poor victim. This is the same rhetoric we hear over and over again.

Whatever. I no longer care about mexico's "perspective" regarding illegal immigration since I have never heard any one of them be intellectually honest in any statements or positions they make on the issue.

It's impossible to have an honest debate with these people when they will not even acknowledge that being in this country illegally presents a problem.