Thread: What Happens When the State Department Sanctions Nations for Not Taking Our Deportees

What Happens When the State Department Sanctions Nations for Not Taking Our Deportees?




A mixed bag


Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
LinkedIn
Email
Copy Link


By David North on January 13, 2022


Some recalcitrant nations are deliberately slow to accept our deportees and other forced returns of migrants from those nations, as my colleague Dan Cadman reported a couple of years ago.

They do so because they do not want these citizens of their countries to bring their behaviors back to the homeland. Most democracies, including the U.S., readily accept similar rejects from other lands.

Eleven nations have received sanctions for that behavior. What happens to the outward flow from the U.S. of removed migrants from those places? It’s a mixed bag.

In four (in bold below) of the 11 cases, we have what look like success stories; in three of those four, the number of removals has more than doubled since sanctions were imposed, and in a fourth, the ratio was almost 2:1.

In three others it is too soon to tell and in the other four there was little change or, in the case of Burma, a move in the wrong direction.

Our statistics, all drawn from previously under-utilized government files on the subject, are shown below.

Impact of U.S. Sanctions Regarding Other Nations’ Removal Policies, 2011-2019
Nation	Year of Sanctions	Removals That Year	Removals 2019	Change
Burma	2018	42	29	-13
Cambodia	2017	31	81	50
Cuba	2019	136	136	0
Eritrea	2017	42	49	7
The Gambia*	2016	1 or 2	125	+123 or +124
Ghana	2019	287	287	0
Guinea*	2017	90	101	11
Guyana*	2011	189	350	161
Laos	2018	-	6	6
Pakistan	2019	247	247	0
Sierra Leone	2017	41	87	46
Totals		1,106 or 1,107	1,498	+392 or +393
Sources: Columns one and two, “Repatriation of Noncitizens Subject to Final Orders of Removal”, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), 2021; columns three and four: Table 41 in the 2019 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics; column five was calculated by CIS from columns three and four. Only nations sanctioned under section 243 (d) are listed. * Sanctions since lifted. Nations in bold are success stories.

The table would seem to have a major gap: China, India, and Vietnam also have been reluctant to accept the return of their citizens, and none of these nations has been sanctioned.

The sanctions, even where they are applied, are a mild remedy. They consist of denials by the U.S. of some categories of visas to the U.S. In one instance that I recall, but cannot document, the U.S. said to one country, the families of two or three specific cabinet members were barred from getting tourist visas to the U.S. That isn’t even a slap on the wrist.

The U.S., under several presidents, has been unwilling to use reductions in USAID projects, for example, as sanctions. That would not help in the case of China, but it could be very valuable in other settings.

I sense a touch of elitism regarding how the State Department handles these matters. No one in the DoS chain of command is likely to be threatened by, for example, Vietnamese criminals in the States. Diplomats, Ivy League grads, and people living in gated communities are rarely assaulted by aliens who should have been deported.

The victims are likely to be other Vietnamese, in this case, and low-income people, generally. The diplomats have other fish to fry and do not worry (as they should) about crime in American communities.


https://cis.org/North/What-Happens-W...-Our-Deportees

They should be expelled. Fly them back, unload them.