Posted by: mcq on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 If Mexico were bent on driving the rest of US public opinion against illegal immigrants coming over the southern border, I can't imagine a better way than with a spate of law suits (a true way to be a "neighbor and friend"): Mexico said Tuesday that it would file lawsuits in U.S. courts if National Guard troops on the border become directly involved in detaining migrants.Of course the claim is that National Guard troops will only be involved in support of any effort on the border. And, of course, it is perfectly legal to use National Guard troops for such a role. So why the possibility of suits? Mexican border officials also said they worried that sending troops to heavily trafficked regions would push illegal migrants into more perilous areas of the U.S.-Mexican border to avoid detection.Obviously the crossing patterns will change as more personnel (be they NG or Border Patrol agents) are plugged into the more popular (and easy) crossing points. Illegal immigrants will seek less patrolled areas in which to cross. The plan calls for the Guard to provide intelligence and support (thereby releasing more BP agents for duty on the border) for a year until 6,000 more BP agents are trained for border patrol assignment. I've outlined my problems with the National Guard plan here. But suffice it to say, filing lawsuits against an overwhelmingly popular reaction to the flood of illegal immigrants seems to me to be self-defeating — at least in the realm of US public opinon. "If there is a real wave of rights abuses, if we see the National Guard starting to directly participate in detaining people ... we would immediately start filing lawsuits through our consulates," Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez told a Mexico City radio station. He did not offer further details.Notice the implicit assumption found in Derbez's statement:"If there is a real wave of rights abuses ...". What, troops equal "rights abuses"? How else do you interpret any other way. And then this: Mexican officials worry the crackdown will lead to more deaths. Since Washington toughened security in Texas and California in 1994, migrants have flooded Arizona's hard-to-patrol desert and deaths have spiked. Migrant groups estimate 500 people died trying to cross the border in 2005. The Border Patrol reported 473 deaths in the fiscal year ending Sept. 30.That's a legitimate worry for Mexicans, i.e. increased deaths. However, is "Grupo Beta's" deployment one which will help keep illegals from trying to cross in more remote areas? Well, read how this description of the group is phrased: "Hi, we're from the government and we're here to help (you cross illegally, but safely)." Nice little euphemism for illegal immigrants, eh? "Northbound migrants"? (But then consider the way AP writes the story — the lawsuits are threatened if the NG becomes directly involved in apprehending "migrants".) And notice that Grupo Beta's job is to ease entry through protection of illegals, er, "northbound migrants" from "criminals", and not prevent or discourage illegal entry. Nunez also made a statement which I'd consider a good possibility since the present plan, in reality, is wholly inadequate for real border security: Sending the National Guard "will not stop the flow of migrants, to the contrary, it will probably go up," as people try to get into the U.S. in the hope that they could benefit from a possible amnesty program, Nunez said.There is the "A" word again, and what she says is absolutely correct as long as it is left out there as a possibility. Regardless of what the White House claims, a "temporary worker program" with a "path to citizenship" equals amnesty to most of those here illegally. And that means others will try to get here as well so they can be included in the eventual deal. This is one of the reasons so many people are calling for the umbrella immigration issue to be broken out into border security first (as a separate bill) and once the borders are secure to our satisfaction (IOW, we see real not vapor progress in securing them) then take up immigration and the status of illegals. However, back to the point of the post, I can't imagine a worse PR disaster for Mexico than for it to try tying up the ability of the US to secure its borders within our own court system. Americans are a sympathetic lot and have a great deal of empathy toward people trying to better their lives. That's why this is such a divisive issue within the populace. But as a British newspaper found out when it tried to influence the vote in an Ohio county, Americans do not take well to foreign entites trying to intrude on what we feel is our domestic business. Fair warning to Mexico. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| TrackBacks | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Return to Main Blog Page | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments For This Post | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Previous Comments to this Post |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Add Your Comment | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
| Vicious Capitalism |
Buy Dale's Book!
|
