Monday, January 9, 2006
Mexico and the U.S. need diplomacy, not fences
By Carlos Luken
Mexican and American citizens receive a daily barrage of biased information regarding
immigration. And aggravated constituents demand action and results.
But neither president Vicente Fox of Mexico, nor George W. Bush of the U.S., seem to
be making any headway as they apparently react to internal political pressures, while trying to outdo each others attempt
to satisfy their constituencies.
The problem in this approach is that both leaders are unilaterally reacting to effects
and trying to fix the consequences of illegal immigration, not its causes. As a result recent confrontations are sad reminders
of Murphy’s Law – a problem left unattended will worsen rather than fix itself.
Now U.S. immigration reform initiatives threaten to contaminate the already rarified
atmosphere, by resurrecting a historical failure in the building of a wall to keep illegal immigrants out of the U.S.
Unfortunately Mexico’s blistering reaction further broadens the gap for a diplomatic
resolution.
Obviously a wall is not a solution. Nor is name calling.
A wall’s failure is evident, historic and foreseeable. So is the encouraging
of citizens to immigrate to another country under illegal conditions in order to alleviate national problems.
What is clear is that both countries have mutual yet inverse labor problems that will
only be solved with shared policy implementation. As each nation seeks its own benefits diplomacy should be implemented. The
two countries need to have real meetings of minds that can realistically solve problems without infringement on sovereignty,
and thus a permanent solution could be reached if they would stop procrastinating and consider the advantageous geography,
traditions, good relations and economic benefits.
Although the wall has not been built completely, its concept has already aggravated passions
on both sides of the border – as one of the world’s most affable frontiers has incongruously turned into another
spot in Latin America to carry the freshly popular torch of anti-Americanism. While Mexican authorities insist that the wall will not deter some 400,000 aspiring
migrants from crossing the border, it will make their journey more hazardous by forcing them towards more remote and dangerous
areas.
United States opponents agree, arguing that the wall will cost taxpayers billions, be environmentally unsound, and
its supervision will be logistically impossible.
Increased military involvement and the structuring of rigid defense lines didn’t
work for the French when they built their Maginot line, and though diehard supporters reason that it was built to keep enemies
out there is little similarity between Hitler’s Warmacht, and ragtag groups of immigrants led by professional
smugglers, called coyotes.
Can’t intelligent persons in the U.S. Congress and Mexican Government learn from
history?
A wall is an ill-advised solution as the French fortification demonstrated, for there
are always ways to bypass rigid defenses. The wall project will block about 30 percent of the 2000-mile long U.S.-Mexico border,
meaning 70 percent will remain accessible. Plus there are great extensions of unprotected coastlines.
Has anybody thought that migrants can fly to Canada, and illegally cross that porous
northern border? Or is a Canada wall next?
There is logical opposition to walls by most Latin American countries, not only because
expatriate revenue represents vital sources of foreign income for their faltering economies, but too healthy solutions to
unemployment. Most U.S. border business communities oppose walls, as do the U.S. farm and service industries that fear workers
will not be found for menial jobs some Americans shun in favor of welfare benefits.
For decades Latin America workers have been encouraged to travel illegally into the
United States by U.S. business, in order to gain employment and support their families. And migrants will do anything possible
to reach their goal. As in the past, they will swim, use makeshift barges, or face treacherous desert dangers.
Historically speaking, a U.S. Maginot line will only stubbornly increase the number
of casualties.
Each of the two neighbors face severe labor and immigration problems that have been unfortunately
procrastinated over for decades. This as politicians either dillydally, or take extreme measures to meet the demands of some
constituent groups – whereas people on both sides of the border are hurting as they wait for real, responsible and permanent
solutions.
If immigration serves the interests of both nations, why then has hysteria displaced
diplomacy by sponsoring isolationism in todays globalize world? The solution may be controlled temporary immigration regulations,
managed employment programs, and mutual law enforcement diligence.
However stubborn governments, concrete walls and isolationism are the same mixtures
that have proven to be unworkable and failed solutions in the past – like the Maginot line.
Carlos Luken, a MexiData.info columnist, is
a Mexico-based businessman and consultant. He can be reached via e-mail at ilcmex@yahoo.com.
