[ad_1]
The head of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Filippo Grandi, has visited Mexico this week within the framework of agreements signed with the Government to deal with the refugee emergency that the country is experiencing these days. A few days before the interview, the Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance (Comar), warned that asylum requests have soared so far this year, more than 116,000, almost three times the figure of last year and more than double that makes two. The caravans that depart almost weekly from the southern capital, Tapachula (Chiapas), offer a new face to the tragedy experienced by thousands of people as they pass through the country. Just five days ago, immigration authorities detained 600 migrants crammed into trailers in Veracruz, and the daily trickle of hundreds more keeps cities bordering Guatemala and, to the north, the United States on the brink of collapse. “Mexico is experiencing an unprecedented migration crisis,” Grandi declares in an interview with EL PAÍS.
The High Commissioner explains that the main challenge is to offer migratory alternatives other than refuge to the thousands of migrants who cross Mexico each year. For many, faced with the daunting task of reaching the United States for years without being detained and deported, applying for asylum is the only way out. So Mexico has recently become a destination country and not just in passing, as it had traditionally been. And this new context forces us to rethink the migration strategy to respond to thousands of people who are looking for a future not so far north.
Question. How big is the displacement crisis that Mexico has been experiencing in recent months?
Answer. I never like to say if it is the biggest, the smallest, the most urgent … Because unfortunately we have a growing number of refugee crises in the region. But what is clear is that Mexico is today under an unprecedented crisis, with pressure from the flow of people from the southern border, not only with the traditional migration of those who come from Central America, but also Venezuelans, Haitians and others. in increasing numbers. In addition, it has pressure from the north, which is very particular because it is the result of the immigration policies of the United States. Let’s see what happens there with the MPP [Protocolo de Protección de Migrantes, por sus siglas en inglés], with Title 42, which is very problematic even though we understood the particular situation in which it was implemented [con la pandemia], violates the basic principle of allowing people to have access to the asylum process and they are being returned to their countries of origin from where they fled due to violence.
P. Given the enormous workload and the low budget that Comar has denounced, an institution that they have supported for years with resources, where in critical areas such as Tapachula they even work in the same office and seem to be the same staff, to what extent does the government body need UNHCR to exist?
R. I think that despite the difficult situation, especially with the arrival of people from Haiti, on this visit I have observed phenomenal progress from Comar. I remember very well how it was four years ago and now it has much more presence. Yesterday we opened a Comar office in Tijuana and two years ago we opened the Tapachula office. This is important and we have to recognize it, because it has capacity. But unfortunately the challenges are growing faster than the Comar’s capacity.
In terms of financing, more than 60% of the Comar’s budget comes from UNHCR. We have had a very constructive meeting with Undersecretary Alejandro Encinas and I have repeated what I have said many times: it is necessary for the Government to invest more resources in this national institution, and even more so in a situation of migration crisis of this dimension. But also, it is necessary to explore migratory alternatives other than refuge. And we have seen political goodwill for this.
P. Now a migrant who steps on Mexican soil has no choice but to request refuge in order not to be detained, not so much because he wants to stay and live in Mexico. Has the concept of asylum been distorted?
R. The problem is that it cannot be the only recourse. Right now the problem is the Haitians. The Comar is saturated with work, especially in the Tapachula offices, due to the asylum requests of the people of Haiti who also have no reason to request it, many come from countries that are not classified as violent or risky, such as Brazil or Chile . And most likely they will not receive recognition as refugees. But this is the only measure they have to enter the country and they are a particularly vulnerable group, they cannot return to their country of origin. It is a very special situation and our proposal to the Government is to establish what we call an immigration alternative. A condition that can be formulated in very different ways, but that allows them to stay here legally without shelter.
P. But these alternatives already exist, humanitarian visas, temporary ones, work visas … It is not necessary to create new ones. Why do you think they do not apply?
R. If they exist, they have to be adapted to this new situation. But what I have observed is a willingness to do something concrete because it cannot continue like this, because it puts many people at risk who have to wait a long time for a procedure. And when they wait, it creates frustration, fear. The caravans are driven by this situation of uncertainty. So I think there is a favorable context for the application of new measures. But this is not a problem only of Mexico, it is the fundamental problem of Europe, that of not offering an alternative migratory measure. In Spain, Italy, in the Mediterranean, and also in the United States. That is why I think that if we can achieve a migratory alternative here that will work, it would be a very interesting model for other developed countries. I also have a global interest in this answer. It is the future of human mobility.
P. It is inevitable to remember January 2019, when at the border crossing from Guatemala to Mexico, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador took a historic measure of regularizing all arriving migrants with humanitarian visas, although that lasted just a few weeks. How did you observe it then? Did it seem like a possible solution?
R. It is a very complex question. Because the regional political context is completely different, there was Donald Trump. I think that what the three presidents of Mexico, the United States and Canada agreed to last week in Washington is very interesting because it is one of the conclusions of the regional summit. Develop a regional migration pact. This is important and this is new. Formulated like this, although we do not yet know the details, it is very interesting. This is the difference with the Trump period. When the context was not similar or collaborative, of course. All of these countries, and particularly Mexico and the United States, have domestic agendas, but a greater interest in collaborating.
—A few minutes after the interview, Grandi clarifies this response through a message from his press people: “UNHCR’s position is that this is not what we mean by migratory alternatives, as it was an unplanned reaction and not comprehensive that did not guarantee solutions for people. Now we propose something much more comprehensive, with real alternatives ”-.
P. After the latest natural disasters, earthquake in Haiti, hurricanes, health and economic crisis due to the pandemic … Do you expect the refugee crisis to be even more critical next year?
R. I don’t know, I hope not, but the factors are many. I’m very worried. We have not seen a decline in recent years. Unfortunately, I am not very optimistic. I believe that we are going to see an increase in the number of displaced people and the complexity of these flows as well.
Subscribe here to newsletter of EL PAÍS México and receive all the informative keys of the current situation of this country
[ad_2]