Human Rights Workshop: Adam Isacson on the Human Cost of Border Crackdowns

At the Human Rights Workshop on September 5, 2019, Adam Isacson spoke about the impact of U.S. border policy on Central American migrants. Isacson, who is the Director for Defense Oversight at the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), described an increasingly chaotic and dangerous path for Central Americans leaving their countries, spurred by ineffectual strategies to curb migration.

WOLA focuses on defense and security in Latin America. Since 2011, Isacson’s work with the organization has primarily concerned border security and migration. He has visited the U.S.-Mexico border about 20 times and has completed extensive field research along the Mexico-Guatemala border.

Isacson began his presentation by undermining the notion that the influx of migrants at the United States’ southern border is new or unprecedented. He pointed out that while the number of migrants trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border represents a “big jump” since last year, the rates are still significantly lower than 10 or 12 years ago. The number of single adults entering the country, he added, is even lower than it was in the 1970s.  

However, while the numbers are not unusual, the situation at the border has changed in other ways. “What was unthinkable in 2012,” Isacson commented, “is that the majority of migrants are non-Mexican”—rather, they come from countries such as Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. Two out of three migrants are parents or children. In addition, Isacson noted, “the vast majority are desiring to be apprehended, waiting to be picked up and processed.”

Choosing to be apprehended, however, is unlikely to enhance migrants’ safety — even for people with legitimate asylum claims. Migrants are rarely informed of the specific requirements for gaining asylum, leaving them unaware of which aspects of their experience to accentuate. “When you ask people why they’re leaving home,” Isacson said, “it’s often not just one reason.” The asylum process does not easily accommodate multiple motivations, he explained, so “there’s a chance you might say the wrong thing in an asylum interview.”

Moreover, Isacson suggested, receiving an asylum interview at all is far from guaranteed. Border patrol now physically blocks migrants from crossing onto U.S. soil, where they would be legally entitled to make asylum claims. “They’ll say, ‘We are too full,’” Isacson explained. Migrants are put on “makeshift waitlists” to cross into the U.S., he added, with no idea of when they might be permitted into the country.

In the meantime, people are “marooned” in dangerous cities just south of the U.S.-Mexico border, where kidnappings and rape are common. If someone does finally manage to get a court date in the U.S., Isacson said, “they send them back to Mexico to be homeless and await their court date in these dangerous border cities.”

These practices are complemented by the proliferation of immigration checkpoints along common routes through Mexico. The checkpoints, Isacson clarified, have no deterrent effect on migrants who can spend the $8000–10,000 required to gain a spot on one of the “express buses” that take people north, paying off checkpoint officials along the way to guarantee safe and efficient passage. “If you don’t have the money, though,” Isacson said, “it’s very, very risky.” The checkpoints force poor migrants onto ever more remote routes, where “your chances of being assaulted or worse are very high.”

The changes Isacson described are part of the Trump administration’s anti-immigration policies, intended to severely restrict the number of migrants entering the United States. Isacson argued that the administration’s strategies are misguided, citing data that “the migration numbers start climbing back up again” after each renewed crackdown. “If you ignore corruption and focus on crackdowns,” he contended, “it’s like eating sugar and getting energy for an hour.”

Isacson also criticized President Trump’s choice to “cut aid to Central American countries as the migrant crisis deepens.” He added, “Cuts will likely be aimed at civil society groups, community-level violence prevention programs,” and other initiatives targeting the problems causing people to leave in the first place.

While Isacson made it clear that current U.S. policy harms Central American migrants without altering migration flows long-term, he acknowledged that possibilities for change are presently limited. Without a fundamental political shift, he lamented, “We’re going to be doing very small measures as the overall problem continues to mount.”