FOCUS: New Challenges in an Increasingly Turbulent World

 

 

T he international scene has been marked by instability and conflict: the war in Ukraine, the Israeli massacre in the Gaza Strip, the Israeli incursions in Lebanon and Syria, the civil war in Sudan, the armed conflicts in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Myanmar, Pakistan, Iran, Colombia, Haiti and Mexico, to name a few, encompass devastation and a worldwide number of people dead, missing, displaced and in need of humanitarian aid, which has reached its highest level in decades.

Although Mexico is not experiencing an armed conflict or an open war recognized as such, the levels of violence reached due to the dispute for territorial control between the large cartels with the greatest presence in the territory have had consequences similar to those of these contexts.

To this already volatile reality, the return of Donald Trump to the presidency of the United States adds tension. Since his inauguration, there has been a great international stir, as, very attached to his ideology of“America First”, he has launched a series of decrees that have generated both expectations and concerns in the global arena and some in particular for Mexico.

In this sense, the immigration issue, already controversial, has taken on particular relevance with the new measures and executive orders launched since the first day of his government, with Mexico being especially affected due to its proximity to the United States and the enormous number of Mexicans living in the United States (it is estimated that at least 11 million, of which four million are in an irregular situation).

Cooperation or confrontation?

Since his first presidency, Trump has generated a complicated relationship with Mexico due to his racist and anti-immigrant discourse and his threats about the construction of a border wall that should have been paid for by Mexico, as well as the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement and the imposition of tariffs.

With his return, he has again adopted a tough stance towards Mexico, reaffirming his commitment to border security, which he has materialized by exerting pressure on the Mexican government to control the borders in order to stop migratory flows and drug trafficking, mainly fentanyl, in addition to threatening again with the imposition of tariffs if it does not do so.

While cooperation is crucial, it also poses challenges for Mexican sovereignty and the management of its internal policies. Since Trump took office and until today, various dialogues have taken place between him and President Claudia Sheinbaum to reach some agreements. The most talked about so far has been the one to postpone the application of the 25% tariffs for a month in exchange for the Mexican government sending 10,000 members of the armed forces to the border with the US to prevent illicit drug trafficking and participate in immigration control task. “The important thing is dialogue (…) It is about collaborating, coordinating, without losing sovereignty, with respect for our territories,” said Sheinbaum.

From decrees to absurdities

In his first 24 hours as president, Trump launched a series of executive orders, many of them focused on transforming immigration policies. For example, since January 20th, the use of the CBP One mobile application, which allowed people to schedule appointments at border entry points between Mexico and the United States to request asylum, was canceled; the entry of undocumented people into the United States under any circumstances was suspended, arguing that it is an invasion; the elimination of obtaining citizenship by birthright was proposed. However, this order immediately received multiple lawsuits in federal courts, so a judge temporarily blocked it; and, mass deportations have begun, as well as raids by the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Service (ICE) in different states of the country.

Another point included in one of Trump’s executive orders is the reactivation of the “Remain in Mexico” program, which requires asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their hearing dates in the United States. The question is: if it is now practically impossible to access the US asylum system, how does the new administration intend to implement this program? In addition, the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) has noted that “during Trump’s first administration, more than 71,000 asylum seekers had to ‘stay in Mexico’ and that human rights monitoring organizations collected more than 1,500 examples of violent crimes that these people suffered during their wait at the hands of organized crime in Mexico and corrupt officials. The program enriched the cartels by providing them with a vulnerable population to kidnap and extort, and complicated relations between the United States and Mexico.”

The threat of mass deportations and border control

During his campaign, Trump promised to carry out a mass deportation of undocumented migrants. He then claimed that the detentions and deportations would focus on “criminals” and people with a criminal record, but since the first weeks of his term, when the raids began, this has not been the case. NBC reported that it is not possible to find data from the first days of his term, but they managed to find that “of the 4,422 people detained by ICE, in the first two weeks of February alone, 1,800 (41%) had no criminal convictions or pending criminal charges.”

This situation has generated fear and uncertainty among the migrant population, which has even caused many to take shelter in their homes and not go out for their daily activities, such as work, school or even shopping for food. In addition, it has further polarized the population.

While Sheinbaum said that Mexico received 4,094 deportees during the first week of Trump’s presidency —mostly Mexicans— according to official figures, this does not represent a big change, since during the administration of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (2018-2024), Mexico received up to 6,500 deported migrants per week. Until mid-February, the figure almost reached 14,000; of which approximately 3,000 have been of other nationalities, despite the Mexican government’s request to Washington to deport migrants to their countries of origin, not to Mexico.

Regarding immigration control, according to the organization Doctors Without Borders (MSF), since the last Trump administration, Mexican authorities have been actively preventing migrants and asylum seekers from reaching cities near the border with the United States. In the last quarter of 2024 alone, more than 475,000 migrants were reportedly detained on the Mexican side, an increase of nearly 68% compared to the same period last year.

They also note that “the Mexican government has carried out a historic and sustained crackdown on migration, detaining record numbers of migrants. In 2024, we observed a pattern of Mexican authorities busing large groups of migrants from the north of the country back to the south, forcing them to restart an endless cycle of attempts to cross Mexico, repeatedly exposing them to violence and extortion.”

These new measures have put Mexico in a complex situation, and new challenges may arise for the country. For example, with mass deportations, the greatest impact will likely be seen at the local level, as communities try to assimilate the returns. The lack of resources and opportunities, coupled with the fact that many families have maintained a certain standard of living thanks to remittances, could increase conflicts and put families in a situation of even greater vulnerability and risk of falling into the networks of organized crime. Something similar could happen with migrants who have been stranded in Mexico and who could also be more exposed to human rights violations.

In addition, the decision of the Trump administration to freeze and drastically reduce USAID’s international cooperation programs has directly affected the shelter and protection system for migrants, with projects that have had to close or restructure, further reducing their response capacity.

Polarization

Since his previous campaign and mandate, Trump has been characterized by his handling of an openly racist and anti-immigrant discourse. This has caused the perception of immigrants of various nationalities in the United States to be strongly affected, which has led to an increase in xenophobia and discrimination.

This context has generated a strong polarization in the neighboring country, because, although the Trump government has a good number of supporters and broad support from officials and politicians, it is also true that a good part of the population and some rulers do not share his vision and hate speech.

We have seen how after the implementation of his orders and decrees, various reactions have arisen. Legislators in some states led by Democrats have sought ways to give tools to undocumented immigrants so that they can defend themselves against the new reality and have tried to create a kind of “shield” to protect schools, churches and other spaces from immigration raids. Likewise, religious leaders such as Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde have asked Trump to show mercy to LGBTQ+ people and migrants, and have demanded that he avoid arrests of migrants in places of worship.

It has also been reported that employers have protected their workers, people have hidden undocumented immigrants in their homes or even, during raids, yelled at them not to go out, that they have that right.

Likewise, a series of protests have taken place such as the so-called “a day without migrants”, where mainly Hispanic people were called upon not to attend work or school. An international boycott of American brands that support Trump was also called upon by not consuming their products, and demonstrations have been held in several states, where thousands of people have taken to the streets with slogans such as: “Immigrants pay more taxes than Trump”, “Stop mass deportations” and “No one is illegal on stolen land”.

Impact on the Mexican Southeast

According to statistics from the Migration Policy, Registration and Identity of Persons Unit of SEGOB, based on data from the official repatriation points of the National Institute of Migration (INM), during 2024, Chiapas registered the highest number of deportees from the United States, with a total of 19,959 Chiapanecos repatriated, followed by Guerrero with 18,135 and Oaxaca which registered 15,912.

During the new Trump administration, there are still no exact figures, but it is possible that these three southeastern states will maintain the highest numbers, since due to their contexts of violence and poverty, they have been characterized as expelling states for decades.

Recently, the United States government determined that flights with Mexicans deported from that country only arrive at the southern border of Mexico, specifically Tapachula, which some consider could generate both a social and economic impact on the city. “Everything seems to indicate that those who do not manage to return immediately will have to stay in the city for at least a day or two, which would imply expenses in lodging, food and other basic services, which could generate an economic spillover in specific sectors,” said the president of the Association of Established Merchants and Property Owners of Tapachula (ACEITAP).

The first flight arrived on February 20th with a total of 122 people, the next day 84 were repatriated, on Saturday 157 arrived and this Tuesday 107 were deported, totaling 470 people from Puebla, Guerrero, Chiapas, Morelos, Oaxaca, Guanajuato, Veracruz and Mexico City, among others. Deportees are given a Welfare card with 2,500 pesos so they can get to their states of origin, and in some cases, they are helped to buy a bus ticket for their return to their towns of origin.

Also in Chiapas, the National Institute of Migration (INM), the National Guard and the Municipal Police intensified operations, mainly in Tapachula and migratory corridors, with the objective of detaining migrants who are in national territory in an irregular situation.

In this regard, the Southern Border Monitoring Collective denounced the increase in inspections and detentions of migrants on highways and in cities such as Comitan, San Cristobal de Las Casas and Tuxtla Gutierrez, as part of the deployment of the Pakal Immediate Reaction Forces (FRIP).

These operations and detentions, like the raids that take place in the United States, have generated tension in those who seek to remain in the country or continue their journey to the north, and maintain them in fear and uncertainty.

There is concern that, with Trump’s new demands for the control of migration flows, the increase in militarization and the recent presence of the FRIP, there will be an increase in actions that violate the human rights of people and families on the move.

More ideas to come

It seems that every day new ideas for immigration control emerge from the imagination of the president of the United States. Just in the last week of February, he announced the creation of a registry for undocumented migrants and launched a new campaign to deport unaccompanied migrant children.

Regarding the registry, they have pointed out that it is mandatory and have warned that those who do not send their information to be included in the new database could face criminal sanctions. This system is intended to force undocumented immigrants to leave the United States “voluntarily.”

As for the offensive against unaccompanied minors, the initiative establishes that ICE agents must follow the trail of unaccompanied minors to determine whether they are summoned to court or deported. Migrant defense organizations denounce that this campaign against children has as its real target the relatives who take them in.

Thus, it is very likely that this scenario of policies, executive orders, decrees and contradictions will continue in the coming months. What will be the position of the Mexican government? Are there conditions to deal with the repercussions of the policies and threats of Donald Trump’s government? Although this article is focused on immigration policies, there are many more areas that will be affected by the occurrences or outbursts of the president of the neighboring country.