TO
purpose of the attack xenophobia that we are witnessing at the beginning of the year, before any debate regarding the migration of our time, we would have to broaden our perspective and look at history and even prehistory. Migration is timeless and universal: it has existed since human beings, inexorably and legitimately, have moved seeking better living conditions for themselves and their families.
From south to north, from east to west, and in other directions, the homo sapiens It has migrated to populate the five continents, and the flows do not stop because the imperative to mitigate the basic needs of food, shelter and clothing are above national borders, ideological creeds, political systems and economic models. And we said it, not now, but always.
Therefore, criminalizing migrants, both in governmental and social sectors of our northern neighbors and in some European countries where the extreme right governs or has a high influence, is dehumanizing, it is antihistorical, it is flagrantly violating human rights. It is a retrograde attitude, contrary to civilization, and contrary even to the foundations of progress.
Legislate for legalize
first the detention and then the expulsion of a migrant without prior trial, only with the summary, interested and factious accusation of a minor official, for example, is contrary to the elementary principles of due process contemplated by various treaties and declarations of human rights, of which the United States is a part.
Separating families, immigrant parents and children who already have US nationality would be contrary to the rule of law because they would be attacking their own citizens by depriving them of their parents. It would also be openly harmful to the dignity of the entire family, by generating irreparable psychological damage. .
Expelling those who only seek better standards of living also means not considering the enormous contribution that migrants make not only to the economies of their countries of origin, but above all to the economies they serve. It is not a subjective opinion, it is a reality accredited with figures.
To cite the case of Mexican migrants, it is public knowledge that remittances are already the country’s second source of foreign currency, only after the export of cars. Last year, remittances reached the historic amount of 60 billion dollars, not counting December. They are a fundamental contribution to the sustenance of their families, their communities of origin and the national economy itself. But the contribution to the US economy is even greater, since they only send around 25 percent of their income to Mexico, the other 75 percent is spent on goods, services and taxes in the local economy, without counting the immense surplus value they generate. in the companies, crops and different economic sectors where they contribute their productive, careful and honest work force.
There are states like California, Texas, New Mexico and Florida, as well as New York and Chicago, whose economies, in some cases with a state GDP higher than that of most European countries, would collapse without work, consumption and contributions prosecutors of migrant workers. The border towns on both sides, especially, would languish.
And it must be said, graduates from higher education and postgraduate institutions also emigrate to the United States, detonating their knowledge there and developing their productive potential. Both they and the rest of the migrant brothers are talented and productive. They come to produce, not to commit crimes. Criminalizing them is a biased, dehumanized and regressive attitude.
As for the T-MEC, it is a mechanism that has benefited all three parties, Mexico, the United States and Canada. It is a collective effort that in game theory is called a positive sum scheme, because in the end no one takes anything from anyone and everyone wins. Of course, with sectors that would have to be reviewed on our part, such as those related to agricultural products, and especially basic grains.
Dismantling, distorting or weakening the USMCA would mean losing competitiveness compared to other markets, such as China and the Asian tigers. Imposing tariffs on imports, something totally contrary to the spirit of free trade markets, would hit all three economies. The tariff charged on the products and inputs that enter would end up being paid by the consumers themselves, which would encourage inflation, shrink the markets and reduce the growth of the economy.
Eliminating and even restricting the scope of the T-MEC would be the end of the largest common market in the world. It would be the best news, but for competitors from other poles of economic power, who have always disputed hegemony on this side of the Atlantic, although it could also lead to a cooling of the world economy. A lose-lose scheme.
In short, an attack against migrants, their criminalization and summary expulsion, would be inhumane and also harmful to the economy that today benefits from their productive workforce. Violating the T-MEC would also be a decision of shared harm for all actors. It is time to raise our gaze and protect the interest of all parties. In future collaborations we will expand on both topics.
