On October 22, 2023, leaders from a dozen Latin American countries met in Mexico to seek solutions to the increase in irregular migration flows in the region.
The meeting took place in the municipality of Palenque, in the state of Chiapas, and ended with the signing of the Palenque Agreement, which proposes a series of measures to solve the migration problem. The measures include sharing responsibility in combating the causes of migration, combating cross-border organized crime, human trafficking and corruption, and promoting cooperation on security issues.
The countries that signed this agreement were Belize, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Panama and Venezuela.
According to the joint statement, it was recognized that “the main structural causes of migration are political, economic, social and the negative effects of climate change.” It was also highlighted that external factors such as “unilateral coercive measures – with reference to the embargoes imposed on Cuba and Venezuela – (…) affect entire populations and, to a greater extent, vulnerable people and communities.”
However, the declaration did not address the role of states as guarantors of civil rights, nor the impact of domestic politics on the quality of life and freedoms of their citizens; for example, the effects of the order in Cuba.
Faced with these challenges, Latin American leaders agreed that “shared responsibility and cooperation are needed to address the structural causes and migratory flows that must be addressed together by countries of origin, transit, destination and return.”
The Palenque Agreement consists of thirteen consensus agreements. The first is comprehensive immigration type and focuses on protecting people’s lives. To this end, it was agreed to develop an action plan that effectively addresses the structural causes of irregular migration in the region. The plan would be based on priority objectives that take into account the individual realities of each country.
The agreed priority areas include food self-sufficiency and sovereignty, the creation of decent jobs, the promotion of education and the development of technical and technological skills, energy security and health self-sufficiency, and the promotion of trade and intra-regional investment.
Aiming to fight poverty and promote well-being in countries with high emigration rates, Mexico also offered advice on implementing initiatives such as “Sowing Life” and “Young People Building the Future” in countries that send migrants, including Cuba. . They also agreed to promote sustainable energy projects and negotiate tariff agreements that facilitate trade and promote food self-sufficiency.
“Sowing Life” is a Mexican government program that promotes food self-sufficiency, rebuilding the social fabric and restoring the environment through agroforestry land. It aims to combat rural poverty and environmental degradation by providing economic support, training and mentoring to participants in twenty states across the country. In the case of Cuba, the program is limited to strengthening agricultural technology and contributing to the right to food security.
According to research by the CONNECTAS platform, the initiative has been criticized in practice due to a lack of legal framework, limited resources and poor coordination; Added to this are “the designation of beneficiaries at their own discretion, the opacity in the management of farmers’ savings and the delay in investigations denouncing their mismanagement”. Experts point out that the political nature of the program could jeopardize its continuity due to the impending presidential succession in Mexico.
On the other hand, “Young People Build the Future” is a program that offers young people between the ages of 18 and 29 who are neither studying nor working, training for up to twelve months. During their training, they receive a monthly stipend of 6,310 pesos and health insurance from IMSS. The aim is for them to acquire work skills in the workplaces of their choice.
According to Emilio López, doctor of migration studies and researcher of the “Geographies of Displacement” project at the University of Texas and the Autonomous University of Chihuahua, the benefits of implementing the above projects in Central America have not reflected the reality and although some countries the may have taken programs as a model, “real investments appear to be limited.” The researcher shared with elTOQUE some reflections on the agreement.
First of all, López points out that the meeting of leaders took place in a migration context in which “the situation is overwhelmed both in the border cities of Tijuana, Nogales, Ciudad Juárez and in some areas in Tamaulipas and Coahuila.”
“I would like to believe that in order to change or stop the flow of migration, it is essential to take into account the options and agreements that the United States offers in relation to asylum.” Currently, in the case of the Cuban population, there are revisions to the Cuban Adjustment and the problem “dry feet, wet feet,” encouraging people seeking asylum through CBP-One to continue with this constant influx. “, he says.
The agreement also proposed cooperation between southern countries, triangulation with North American nations, and dialogue between the United States and Cuba in their bilateral relations. Although the United States and Canada expressed interest in attending the meeting, they were not included. Nevertheless, the agreements reached assume the willingness of both nations to abide by the agreements despite their absence.
“The idea that the United States will consider the officials’ meeting is controversial and raises questions about what it is really negotiating about or what the background to this entire process is.”
“As for the current impact, as the situation at the border worsens, people are more aware of their options for crossing the border.” I have observed that at the border, especially among Cubans, many people and families have begun to look for alternatives , including requesting refuge from COMAR as option b. Cubans easily find employment, especially in the transport and service sectors, which has allowed them to successfully enter the labor market,” explains López.
In the past, when it came to human security, “it rained bullets.”
Among the elements that stood out in the leaders’ speech in Palenque, Chiapas, was human security, that is, protecting and safeguarding the lives of the migrant population. However, according to Emilio López, there are very risky threads of discourse in the agreements that, in his opinion, point to militarization given previous experiences in Latin America.
“When the focus on human security was discussed in Mexico – the so-called “war on drug trafficking” that began in 2006 with the government of Felipe Calderón – it rained bullets. “It ended in a situation of structural violence on the part of the state that continues to this day,” says the researcher.
Added to this is the presence of organized crime groups both in Central America and throughout Mexico, which “have well controlled all flows” and the congestion of reception rooms. In this context, López points out that Mexico is in a constant state of emergency: “In Juárez we are once again seeing spaces in which there are refugee camps.”
“Unfortunately, the agreements discursively focus on human security issues to obscure their true purpose, which is the militarized containment of migration flows.” Therefore, the problem lies in involving security agencies – such as the National Guard – in national issues such as migration,” explains Lopez. The expert emphasizes that greater securitization leads to attempts to reduce the arrival of irregular migrants, using as a main resource the intimidation that comes with the use of the military.
According to the Mexican researcher, it is important to insist on the importance of informed emigration because “people still believe that the crossing will improve their situation”; which does not correspond to reality.
Among the problems that drew Emilio López’s attention regarding the Palenque Agreement is the lack of mention of Cuba as a country of origin for migrants. In his opinion, the omission could be due to the fact that the Cuban migrant population seems to be flexible regarding their immigration projects, since even if they seek asylum in the United States as their first option, they also consider the possibility of staying, working and working in Mexico Send remittances to Cuba if they cannot cross the border.
Second, the omission could be related to political reasons, since recognizing Cuba as a migrant-sending country – a country from which people migrate to seek opportunities abroad – would mean that the Cuban government is unable to to ensure minimum standards of quality of life for its population and would highlight deficiencies in its political and economic system.
“Many of the Cubans who arrived with the 2018 caravan have refugee status. I came across families that I had interviewed a long time ago who are socially well integrated here (Mexico). This means that they have a job, have their status legalized and have social security. So I remember two cases of families telling me: “We had an attempt during the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) process that was not successful, we sought refuge here in Mexico.” “Right now it is practical for them to work here and send money to Cuba,” explains López.
He also highlights that the notable increase in applications for admission to postgraduate and bachelor’s programs from the Cuban population that has received refugee status is particularly interesting at the local level: “In the past, there has been a certain reluctance to accept Cuban applicants Conacyt.” programs due to concerns related to possible problems of dropout or interruption related to the risks associated with crossing the border. However, the solution to this problem appears to lie in the increasing practice of doctoral students submitting their refugee certificates. “The approach provides greater security for academic programs by reducing the risk of students dropping out mid-course.”
During his field studies, the researcher met Cubans who, after deciding to stay in Mexico, work as transport operators, bakers or teachers in sports or arts. According to one Cuban, a transporter can earn the researcher eight thousand Mexican pesos a week (approximately $400). This income made it easier for him to lead a modest life here and send his family,” says the professor.
Among the peculiarities of Cuban migrants, López points to their community culture: “Although generalization is difficult, a greater presence of solidarity networks has been observed, as among the Haitian population.” What is most striking is that Cubans seem to be aware of the regular opportunities to express themselves to settle in both the United States and Mexico if they are denied asylum in Mexico.