S
samsonyuen
Guest
From: www.iht.com/articles/2006...mexico.php
_____________________________
In Mexico, some back walling of the border
By Ginger Thompson The New York Times
THURSDAY, MAY 25, 2006
SEATTLE To build, or not to build, a border of walls? The debate in the United States has started some Mexicans thinking it is not such a bad idea.
Nationalist outrage and accusations of hypocrisy over the prospect have filled airwaves and front pages in Mexico, as expected, fueled by presidential campaigns in which appeals to national pride are in no short supply. But, surprisingly, another view is gaining traction: that good fences can make good neighbors.
The clamorous debate over a border wall has confronted President Vicente Fox at every stop during a visit to the United States that began on Tuesday. While he did not publicly endorse the idea, he made it clear his government was prepared to live with increased border security as long as it came with measures that opened legal channels for the migration of Mexican workers.
Outside his government, several immigration experts have begun floating the idea that real walls, not the porous ones that stand today, could be more an opportunity than an attack.
A wall could dissuade undocumented immigrants from their perilous journeys across the Sonora Desert and force societies on both sides to confront their dependence on an industry characterized by exploitation, they say.
The old blame game - in which Mexico attributed illegal migration to the voracious American demand for labor and accused lawmakers of xenophobia - has given way to a far more soul-searching discussion, at least in quarters where policies are made and influenced, about how little Mexico has done to try to keep its people home.
"For too long, Mexico has boasted about immigrants leaving, calling them national heroes, instead of describing them as actors in a national tragedy," said Jorge Santibáñez, president of the College of the Northern Border. "And it has boasted about the growth in remittances as an indicator of success, when it is really an indicator of failure."
Indeed, Fox - who five years ago challenged the United States to follow Europe's example and open the borders and then barely protested when President George W. Bush announced plans to deploy troops - personifies Mexico's evolving, often contradictory attitudes on illegal immigration.
Gabriel Guerra, a political analyst, said the presidential election in July and the negotiations over immigration reform in Washington have put Fox on unsteady political terrain.
Toning down this country's opposition to a wall might be the best way for Fox to persuade conservatives in the U.S. Congress to support steps to legalize the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States and expand guest worker programs.
On the other hand, accepting what critics have described as a "militarization of the border," without winning legalization programs, could open Fox to criticism that he surrenders to the U.S. will. It could also hurt the aspirations of Felipe Calderón, the candidate Fox backs to succeed him in the July 2 election.
"This is a very risky trip," Guerra said. "If he comes out too strong, he will rattle the conservatives up there. And if he is not strong enough, he will be clobbered by his opponents here."
The deputy minister of foreign relations, Gerónimo Gutiérrez, acknowledged the challenge facing Fox. "We are in the middle of a Ping-Pong of reactions that reflect valid concerns on both sides of the border, as well as an unusually complex moment in the bilateral relationship," he said.
Fox stepped into the middle of the game Tuesday, beginning a sweep through Utah, Washington and California - states that have become important trading partners to Mexico and that have experienced both the pains and benefits of illegal immigration.
In Utah, where officials estimate that the undocumented immigrant population has tripled since 1990 to 90,000, smatterings of protesters followed Fox's visit to Salt Lake City. "Take care of your own people, so they don't have to come here," some shouted.
In his public remarks in Utah, Fox recognized that Mexico must do more to create jobs "so migration becomes a decision and not a necessity," and he conceded that it was the right of the United States to take steps to fortify its borders.
But he said it would take more than police enforcement to resolve the challenges of illegal immigration. "A comprehensive reform," was needed Fox said, to help both countries "concentrate our forces and resources in tending to our security and prosperity concerns."
There are still many in Mexico who oppose the idea of walls. Senator Sylvia Hernández, head of the Senate Foreign Relations Commission for North America, summed up those feelings. "Walls do not speak of dialogue," Hernandez said. "They speak of closure." Rafael Fernández de Castro, editor of the magazine Foreign Affairs en Español, said, "We are getting the stick, but not the carrot."
The presidential candidates have also hewed closely to the old script.
"The more walls they build," said Calderón, of the conservative National Action Party, "the more walls we will jump." Andrés Manuel López Obrador, of the left-leaning Democratic Revolutionary Party, called Fox a U.S. "puppet" for his tepid response to the planned deployment of troops along the border.
Still, signs of a slow but steady change in attitudes emerge in the most improbable places. "It's the best thing that could happen for migrants, and for Mexico," said Primitivo RodrÃguez, an immigrant activist in Mexico, when asked about plans to build walls.
RodrÃguez, who has served as an adviser to the government and an organizer in the United States for the American Friends Service Committee, said the porous border had for years been an important safety valve for Mexico's economy, allowing elected officials to avoid creating jobs or taking legal measures to stop the migration of an estimated 500,000 or more Mexicans a year.
_____________________________
In Mexico, some back walling of the border
By Ginger Thompson The New York Times
THURSDAY, MAY 25, 2006
SEATTLE To build, or not to build, a border of walls? The debate in the United States has started some Mexicans thinking it is not such a bad idea.
Nationalist outrage and accusations of hypocrisy over the prospect have filled airwaves and front pages in Mexico, as expected, fueled by presidential campaigns in which appeals to national pride are in no short supply. But, surprisingly, another view is gaining traction: that good fences can make good neighbors.
The clamorous debate over a border wall has confronted President Vicente Fox at every stop during a visit to the United States that began on Tuesday. While he did not publicly endorse the idea, he made it clear his government was prepared to live with increased border security as long as it came with measures that opened legal channels for the migration of Mexican workers.
Outside his government, several immigration experts have begun floating the idea that real walls, not the porous ones that stand today, could be more an opportunity than an attack.
A wall could dissuade undocumented immigrants from their perilous journeys across the Sonora Desert and force societies on both sides to confront their dependence on an industry characterized by exploitation, they say.
The old blame game - in which Mexico attributed illegal migration to the voracious American demand for labor and accused lawmakers of xenophobia - has given way to a far more soul-searching discussion, at least in quarters where policies are made and influenced, about how little Mexico has done to try to keep its people home.
"For too long, Mexico has boasted about immigrants leaving, calling them national heroes, instead of describing them as actors in a national tragedy," said Jorge Santibáñez, president of the College of the Northern Border. "And it has boasted about the growth in remittances as an indicator of success, when it is really an indicator of failure."
Indeed, Fox - who five years ago challenged the United States to follow Europe's example and open the borders and then barely protested when President George W. Bush announced plans to deploy troops - personifies Mexico's evolving, often contradictory attitudes on illegal immigration.
Gabriel Guerra, a political analyst, said the presidential election in July and the negotiations over immigration reform in Washington have put Fox on unsteady political terrain.
Toning down this country's opposition to a wall might be the best way for Fox to persuade conservatives in the U.S. Congress to support steps to legalize the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States and expand guest worker programs.
On the other hand, accepting what critics have described as a "militarization of the border," without winning legalization programs, could open Fox to criticism that he surrenders to the U.S. will. It could also hurt the aspirations of Felipe Calderón, the candidate Fox backs to succeed him in the July 2 election.
"This is a very risky trip," Guerra said. "If he comes out too strong, he will rattle the conservatives up there. And if he is not strong enough, he will be clobbered by his opponents here."
The deputy minister of foreign relations, Gerónimo Gutiérrez, acknowledged the challenge facing Fox. "We are in the middle of a Ping-Pong of reactions that reflect valid concerns on both sides of the border, as well as an unusually complex moment in the bilateral relationship," he said.
Fox stepped into the middle of the game Tuesday, beginning a sweep through Utah, Washington and California - states that have become important trading partners to Mexico and that have experienced both the pains and benefits of illegal immigration.
In Utah, where officials estimate that the undocumented immigrant population has tripled since 1990 to 90,000, smatterings of protesters followed Fox's visit to Salt Lake City. "Take care of your own people, so they don't have to come here," some shouted.
In his public remarks in Utah, Fox recognized that Mexico must do more to create jobs "so migration becomes a decision and not a necessity," and he conceded that it was the right of the United States to take steps to fortify its borders.
But he said it would take more than police enforcement to resolve the challenges of illegal immigration. "A comprehensive reform," was needed Fox said, to help both countries "concentrate our forces and resources in tending to our security and prosperity concerns."
There are still many in Mexico who oppose the idea of walls. Senator Sylvia Hernández, head of the Senate Foreign Relations Commission for North America, summed up those feelings. "Walls do not speak of dialogue," Hernandez said. "They speak of closure." Rafael Fernández de Castro, editor of the magazine Foreign Affairs en Español, said, "We are getting the stick, but not the carrot."
The presidential candidates have also hewed closely to the old script.
"The more walls they build," said Calderón, of the conservative National Action Party, "the more walls we will jump." Andrés Manuel López Obrador, of the left-leaning Democratic Revolutionary Party, called Fox a U.S. "puppet" for his tepid response to the planned deployment of troops along the border.
Still, signs of a slow but steady change in attitudes emerge in the most improbable places. "It's the best thing that could happen for migrants, and for Mexico," said Primitivo RodrÃguez, an immigrant activist in Mexico, when asked about plans to build walls.
RodrÃguez, who has served as an adviser to the government and an organizer in the United States for the American Friends Service Committee, said the porous border had for years been an important safety valve for Mexico's economy, allowing elected officials to avoid creating jobs or taking legal measures to stop the migration of an estimated 500,000 or more Mexicans a year.